Well, initially it is not JS. I'm working on our internal compiler's Nim
backend.
Original function source (ML-like language):
applyAllSync(funcs: [(() -> void) -> void], onAllDone: () -> void) -> void {
fold(funcs, \onDoneNothing -> onDoneNothing,
\doBefore : (() -> void) -> () -> void, func : (() -> void)
-> void -> {
\onDone : () -> void-> {
doBefore(\ -> func(onDone))
}
}
)(onAllDone)();
}
We have first-class citizen functions, so we can treat them as usual objects,
which can be returned and used. The syntax here is simple:
() -> void
is like
proc(): void
in parameters
\name -> void
is like
proc(name: T): void
, used as lambda (T might be changed to any, depends on context),
[]
is an array.
Direct conversion with types gives next Nim code:
proc applyAllSync(funcs: seq[proc(t0: proc(): void): void], onAllDone:
proc(): void): void =.
fold(funcs, proc(onDoneNothing: any) =
onDoneNothing, proc(doBefore: (proc(t0: proc(): void): proc(): void),
func: (proc(t0: proc(): void): void)) =
proc(onDone: (proc(): void)) =
return doBefore(proc() =
func(onDone)))(onAllDone)()
It doesn't compile, error is
test.nim(3, 77) Error: ')' expected
Position 77 is a letter f in word func at line 3.
I showed Javascript example previously, because it works. I understand JS type
system and it was just to show syntax.
Again, my question is 'How syntactically nested lambdas and/or closures can be
written?'
