On 15 February 2013 18:01, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > It seems we differ on the definition of a mathematical "function".
I wonder how you came to this conclusion, since 'mathematical functions' were not discussed. Apart from that, your statement: > Here, you have introduced a definition of "function" which conflicts > with the usual meaning of the word when people talk about functional > programming. is incorrect, because most functional languages admit stateful functions, and, consequently, 'when people talk about functional programming', stateful functions are not excluded. But most importantly, the appropriateness of your linguistic exercise still evades me. That continuing exercise is irrelevant to my argumented observation that considering closures 'incompatible with the functional programming model' is incorrect. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
