On May 8, 10:13 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 8, 5:47 pm, namekuseijin <namekusei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > My point is that when all you do is call functions, syntax is > > irrelevant. You call functions pretty much in the same way regardless > > of language: functionname, optionalOpenPar, parameters, > > optionalClosePar. > > then... > > > Functional programming is all about defining functions and applying > > functions. Core ML, Haskell and Scheme are all like that, > > Yet all three use a different syntax to call functions, none of them > the "pretty much the same way" you listed above.
It's still functionName arguments AFAIK. Some using parentheses around the arguments, some around all, some not using parentheses at all. > Haskell and Python have syntax for list operations, that matters. > > Haskell nexts using indentation, the others nest using tokens(**), > that matters. In Haskell, Lisp and other functional programming languages, any extra syntax gets converted into the core lambda constructs. In Lisp languages, that syntax is merely user-defined macros, but in Haskell it's builtin the compiler for convenience. > I can go on, but you get the idea. Point is: functional programmint > isn't "nothing but calling functions". Oh yes, functional programming is all about function definition and function calling. You have a point about higher order functions, but that's really only useful as far as your lambda expressions are useful -- that is, conveniently defining anonymous functions on-the-fly and immediately applying them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
