thank you for the replies. it helps to have guidance when learning.
@Meinbg: true. i think programming is mostly (if not all) imperative.
the functional programming style (sounds like kung fu) just hides all
the 'clutter' underneath. as i understood it, functional programmers
have a hard time keeping state, wrapping it all up in functions and
@Dexen/Alex: thank you. as to my mention of (de), it was to stress
that digging down deeper on how these things work, it will eventually
call EVAL() or a C-implemented
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 04:40:08PM +0100, dexen deVries wrote:
>> please correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems to me the `de' is not *needed*=
>> for creating a function. rather, it's a shorthand of doing the usual thing:=
>> assign a (freshly defined) function to a symbol.
> Any mechanism that sets a symbol's value works (e.g. set, setq, let,
> function paramter binding, etc.)
> 'de' and 'def' just have a special behavior in that theyh detect when
> the value _changed_, and issue a "redefined" message.
> - Alex
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=Unsubscribe