News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Curious Case of Swift's Adoption of Smalltalk Keyword Syntax. Parent comment

Re:The Curious Case of Swift's Adoption of Smalltalk Keyword... by marcosdumay on Sunday June 14, 2020 @11:27AM (#23518361)
Yes, this can be implemented. And languages can trust the developers to not write stuff like f(3, fst:5). This is not a large scale pattern where people need help to refactor.

The one largest obstacle for partial application (at least of the Haskell style) is optional arguments. You just can not have both.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Curious Case of Swift's Adoption of Smalltalk Keyword... by sukilot on Sunday June 14, 2020 @12:55PM (#23519241)
I'd bet 4:1 odds that Haskell supports optional arguments with partial application using something like typeclass magic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Curious Case of Swift's Adoption of Smalltalk Keyword... by marcosdumay on Monday June 15, 2020 @12:51AM (#23523906)
If you want optional arguments and partial application, you need some way to declare that the optional arguments are left blank. Haskell-style syntax has no such way.

But yeah, functors are all about building stuff like that. So there are similar things, just with a different syntax.

[ Parent | on HN ]