Koen Claessen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Cagdas Ozgenc wondered: > > | Is there a reason why partial application cannot be > | applied in arbitrary order? Was it a technical > | difficulty in the design of Haskell? Or is it just > | following beta reduction rigorously? > > Alastair David Reid answered: > > | Haskell doesn't dictate any particular evaluation > | order. If you look at the name of the Haskell report, > | it calls Haskell a "non-strict" language not a "lazy" > | language. > > Somehow I do not think that Cagdas was talking about > evaluation order at all. I think he referred to the > following: Suppose I have a function f which is defined to > have 3 arguments:
Partial application on any subset of arguments regardless of their order has been implemented in the FXSL functional programming library and is described here: http://www.topxml.com/xsl/articles/df/ Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
