What is the advantage of currying?

Re:What is the advantage of currying? by huhtenberg on Saturday February 02, 2013 @07:52AM (#5155872)

It'd be nice to have a form of currying in C/C++ as applied to function pointers. Specifically, if I have

  int foo(void * bar, int baz);

then I should be able to use

  foo(, 10)

where

  int (*)(void *)

is expected.

Taking it beyond constant-based specialization would obviously require a support for closures, but I think it's a safe bet that the standard C will get it sooner rather than later.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What is the advantage of currying? by Someone on Saturday February 02, 2013 @08:18AM (#5155910)

Safe bet? For C, I am not sure of that.

They would want to stay close to the metal, and have true function pointers. Creating those on the fly means having them in the data segment (or some horrendous OS-specific and likely slow hack), and that is at odds with data execution prevention.

C++ already has them, sort of. Templates accept 'anything that you can put () behind'. That includes function pointers and operator() overloads.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What is the advantage of currying? by CJefferson on Saturday February 02, 2013 @08:55AM (#5155953)

In C++11, you can write bind(f,_1,10). Not quite as neat, but not bad.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What is the advantage of currying? by huhtenberg on Saturday February 02, 2013 @12:47PM (#5156665)

A lot of things are possible with C++, but they are universally just that - "not quite as neat".

[ Parent | on HN ]