Why Lambda? 
Author Message
 Why Lambda?

What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?


Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?

Quote:

>What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?

lambda isn't a procedure, it's syntax.  It's used to create user-defined
procedures.

--

GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.



Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?

Quote:

> What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?

Dang!  You're right.  It should be removed.


Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?
But we can do it with (define ...)?
What is the difference?



Quote:

> >What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?

> lambda isn't a procedure, it's syntax.  It's used to create user-defined
> procedures.

> --

> GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
> *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to
newsgroups.
> Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the

group.


Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?

Quote:

>But we can do it with (define ...)?
>What is the difference?

define doesn't create procedures, it creates and assigns variables.  You
still have to use lambda to create the procedure that you assign to the
variable, e.g.

(define plus-2
  (lambda (x) (+ x 2)))

If you're thinking of:

(define (plus-2 x)
  (+ x 2))

That's just a short-hand for the first version I wrote.  It still uses
lambda internally, you just don't have to type it.

But lambda can be used outside of define when you want to use a procedure
without naming it, e.g.

(map (lambda (x) (* x x))
     list-of-numbers)

P.S. Please don't include unnecessary quoted material (e.g. the previous
poster's signature) when replying.

--

GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.



Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?

Quote:


> > What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?

> Dang!  You're right.  It should be removed.

It should never be removed.
I wonder what made you thought so.

There are so many things, almost nothing can be possible
without lambda keyword.

If you can't use lambda you will have to define much more
redundant variables.



Mon, 20 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why Lambda?

Quote:



> > > What is the utility of the procedure "Lambda" in scheme?

> > Dang!  You're right.  It should be removed.

> It should never be removed.
> I wonder what made you thought so.

> There are so many things, almost nothing can be possible
> without lambda keyword. [...]

It was a joke. Schemers worship the all-mighty lambda.

-thant



Mon, 20 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. why lambda ?

2. WHY NOT LAMBDA-PROLOG ?

3. Why is lambda so slow?

4. Why was typed lambda calculus not used?

5. why why why oh why why baby

6. #'(lambda ... (lambda

7. (lambda ()) vs #'(lambda ())

8. no re-binding of nested-scope locals, no re-binding in lambda, no,,, {was Re: lambda)

9. Why, Why Why????

10. why why why (mouse related question)

11. Why, oh why?

12. Enterprise Edition - Why/Why not???

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software