Re: Lua Digest, Vol 78, Issue 2

[KHMan <keinhong@...>]

Evan DeMond wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007 10:24 PM, KHMan <xyz> wrote:
> 
>     Vyacheslav Egorov wrote:
>     > KHMan wrote:
> [snip snip]
>     Shoehorning lambda calculus into Lua, I guess, can be done in
>     many, many different ways. [snip snip]
> 
> I'm not sure I follow that it'd have to be "shoehorned." Doesn't Lua
> contain, or isn't it just a superset of the lambda calculus? Lua is of
> course a lot more procedural than most languages implementing lambda
> calculus, but...
> 
> From Wikipedia: ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda_calculus )
> [snip snip]
> 
> Lua provides facilities for all three of those expressions, the critical
> one being abstractions / anonymous functions.

I was thinking about lambda calculus syntax the way it is formally
written, not equivalence models. Like say, the way it is
implemented in Python. It is of course equivalent to lots of
things but for some reason, there are programmers who like to have
their functions written using something akin to the formal syntax.

So I suppose (please correct me if I am wrong...) one does not
really need that lambda calculus syntax in Python, but for some
reason, it is implemented. Since I have never formally studied
lambda calculus, I do not care either way.

Anyway, trying to follow XenoLiz's sentences is hard enough
already, come to think of it, I truthfully am not sure any more
what XenoLiz was trying to do with all those 'lambda' bits in his
example syntax. ;-)

-- 
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia