Cedric, I refactored the problem and this works well. What do you mean "I would favor using a regular function call with a descriptive name"?
I am taking that to mean replace `Base.call` with a function name. But that does not work if the function is in top-level scope in another file. On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 9:56:51 PM UTC-5, Cedric St-Jean wrote: > > Something like this? > > function function1(a, b, f) # Variable needed in callback fun injected. > if(a > b) > c = a + b > res = f(c) # Callback function has been injected. > return res + 1 > else > # do anything > # but return nothing > end > end > > type SomeCallBack > z::Int > end > Base.call(callback::SomeCallBack, c) = c + callback.z > > function1(2, 1, SomeCallBack(10)) > > Because of JIT, this is 100% equivalent to your "callback function has > been injected" example, performance-wise. My feeling is that .call > overloading is not to be abused in Julia, so I would favor using a regular > function call with a descriptive name instead of call overloading, but the > same performance guarantees apply. Does that answer your question? > > On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 9:02:50 PM UTC-5, Bryan Rivera wrote: >> >> I think what I wrote above might be too complicated, as it is an attempt >> to solve this problem. >> >> In essence this is what I want: >> >> >> >> function function1(a, b, onGreaterThanCallback) >> if(a > b) >> c = a + b >> res = onGreaterThanCallback(c, z) >> return res + 1 >> else >> # do anything >> # but return nothing >> end >> end >> >> >> global onGreaterThanCallback = (c) -> c + z >> >> function1(a, b, onGreaterThanCallback) >> >> >> Problems: >> >> The global variable. >> >> The anonymous function which has performance impact (vs other >> approaches). We could use Tim Holy's @anon, but then the value of `z` is >> fixed at function definition, which we don't always want. >> >> I think that the ideal optimization would look like this: >> >> function function1(a, b, z) # Variable needed in callback fun >> injected. >> if(a > b) >> c = a + b >> res = c + z # Callback function has been injected. >> return res + 1 >> else >> # do anything >> # but return nothing >> end >> end >> >> >> function1(a, b, z) >> >> In OO languages we would be using an abstract class or its equivalent. >> But I've thought about it, and read the discussions on interfaces, and >> don't see those solutions optimizing the code out like I did above. >> >> Any ideas? >> >
