[bitc-dev] currying for zero arguments

[Geoffrey Irving]

Does that mean you dislike the (-> a) => (unit -> a) replacement?  If
not, the syntax adjustment should be minimal.

Sorry for not catching it earlier. :)

Geoffrey

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <shap at eros-os.com> wrote:
> Damn! I *really* wish somebody had asked this yesterday. Completely
> obvious but I'm now most of the way through a useless re-syntax.
>
> Bother.
>
> Thanks for catching this as quickly as you did, though.
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:16 AM, Geoffrey Irving <irving at naml.us> wrote:
>> If we adopt currying syntax for function application, what will be the
>> notation for calling a zero-argument C function?
>>
>> One option would be to map zero-argument C functions to unit -> a, and
>> forbid zero argument functions in the type system.  I think the
>> calling conventions are operationally the same (or at least
>> compatible), so this wouldn't require any wrapper code.
>>
>> Geoffrey
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitc-dev mailing list
>> bitc-dev at coyotos.org
>> http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitc-dev mailing list
> bitc-dev at coyotos.org
> http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
>