hi, Just a couple of paragraphs further on in the book (p. 137): "In our definition of times-n, we created a local x using let and closed over that instead of closing over the argument n directly. But this was only to help focus the discussion on other parts of the function. In fact, closures close over parameters of outer functions in exactly the same way as they do over let locals. Thus times-n could be defined without any let at all."
regards, naipmoro On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:20 PM, larry <larrye2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I saw this example of a simple closure in Joy of Clojure and on some > Clojure tutorial page. > > (defn adder[n] > (let [x n] > (fn[y] (+ y x)))) > > Is the let necessary? It seems redundant. > I tried it like this and it seems to work fine. > > (defn adder[n] > (fn[y] (+ y n)) > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
