Re: [Boost-docs] The beauty of LATEX

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] The beauty of LATEX
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-26 15:02:55

on Wed Oct 26 2011, Joel de Guzman <joel-AT-boost-consulting.com> wrote:

> On 10/26/2011 4:40 PM, Daniel James wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 25 October 2011, Joel de Guzman wrote:
>
>> 
>>     On 10/25/2011 6:01 PM, Daniel James wrote:
>>     >
>>     > Yes, that works. Although now when you want to pass the function as a
>>     > parameter, you have to define another lambda function. Which could get
>>     > very verbose - especially if the function takes a few arguments. It
>> 
>>     That's how it's done in lisp/scheme, it's foolish to go invent
>>     something else.
>> 
>>     > also requires you to always know how many arguments a function takes.
>> 
>>     What's wrong with that? Ah, you want it like C function pointers
>>     where you pass only f and be done with it? That's too limiting.
>>     You can't even curry with it.
>> 
>> 
>>  You can do that in Scheme:
>> 
>> http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-12.html#%_sec_1.3.1
>
> Oh right, I forgot about that. Yes, we can have both.

No offense, but this is starting to sound a little silly...  Could
someone explain to me why we don't use a real scheme (or some other)
interpreter?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com