Is that a fact? That would be sad, since it would mean that a functional style suffers a performance penalty in Julia.
On Wed, Jun 04 2014, Mauro <mauro...@runbox.com> wrote: > The anonymous function approach is shorter if you need to pass it to a > function, e.g.: > map(x -> f2(3,4,x), 1:5) > > But I think they have not the same performance as proper functions. > > On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 11:39, tomas.lyc...@gmail.com wrote: >> I don't think you can avoid f1 completely, but there is a one-line syntax >> to obtain the same thing: >> >> f1(a,b) = f2(3,a,b) >> >> I can't imagine a syntax to express that thing that is more compact yet >> equally expressive. >> >> // T >> >> On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 12:37:47 PM UTC+2, joanenric barcelo wrote: >>> >>> First of all, sorry if the question in the title is not well explained. >>> Basically, what I want to know if some of you guys know a nicer way to do >>> the following: >>> >>> function f2(a, b, c) >>> return a+b+c >>> end >>> >>> f = function f1(a,b) >>> f2(3,a,b) >>> end >>> so >>> f(1,1) >>> is 5 >>> >>> What I want to do is to create a new function "f" which is similar to "f2" >>> but with only two arguments. The first argument is implicit. >>> Anyone knows how f1 can be avoided? Thanks!! >>> >>> Joan >>> --
