Higher Order Function Question

Richard Carlsson <>
Mon May 27 18:29:36 CEST 2002


On Mon, 27 May 2002, Fredrik Linder wrote:

> > but there is no notation "fun M:F/A" for functions in other modules,
> 
> But wouldn't it be nice to have that syntax though. (Could be
> syntactical suger for {M, F}) but I guess that would remove the /A
> check, if there is one)

It has been suggested several times before, but is probably not a good
idea, because of the difference between a fun and a remote call. A fun
means "exactly the specified code, nothing else" while a remote-call
means "whatever code is called M:F/A at this moment". There are several
technical complications because of this, which could give a "fun M:F/A"
some rather unexpected behaviour - not a good thing in Erlang.

	/Richard


Richard Carlsson ()   (This space intentionally left blank.)
E-mail: 	WWW: http://www.csd.uu.se/~richardc/
 "Having users is like optimization: the wise course is to delay it."
   -- Paul Graham




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list