Re: [boost] painless currying

Subject: Re: [boost] painless currying
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-25 05:33:35

On 25/08/2011 01:18, Daniel James wrote:
> On 24 August 2011 23:11, Mathias Gaunard<mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>> On 08/24/2011 06:55 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>
>>> That's an asymmetry about most currying syntax that I never liked, at
>>> least for C++.  I suppose when all functions are fully lazy there's no
>>> assymmetry, but that's not C++.  In C++ we have parens to trigger
>>> evaluation.  Even in Phoenix, laziness only goes partway: you still need
>>> parens to trigger final evaluation.
>>
>> ML-based languages are not lazy and have had currying for 40 years.
>> Yet the academics behind functional programming, lambda calculus, theorem
>> proving and logic still seem to fancy them a lot.
>
> But ML doesn't have C++ style overloading. Currying certain overloaded
> functions is ambiguous.

Which is why I suggested only applying currying to monomorphic functions.