in reply to Re: The first lambda language to go mainstream ?
in thread The first lambda language to go mainstream ?

Some searching leads one to the detail that C doesn't have true first-class functions because they aren't nestable, although GCC supports them as an extension, and also because pointer-defined functions don't close over their free variables.

  • Comment on Re^2: The first lambda language to go mainstream ?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: The first lambda language to go mainstream ?
by morgon (Priest) on Aug 11, 2010 at 21:01 UTC
    You can argue that C does not have first-class functions and I would agree - that was not my point.

    The point I was trying to make above is that (in my opinion) having first-class functions is not enough for a language to be called a "lambda language" (meaning functional language).

    Otherwise practically every current language would be a "lambda language" and the term would not be very useful.

    And so I would argue that the statement about JS being the first mainsteam lambda langues is simply wrong and the question weather it was predated by Perl irrelevant.

[reply]
      > Otherwise practically every current language would be a "lambda language" and the term would not be very useful.

      so whats your definition of a lambda language?

      Cheers Rolf

[reply]
        so whats your definition of a lambda language?
        I don't want to start a long thread here so I will certainly not even try to give a definition :-)

        But in the current context let's put it this way:

        Languages that make extensive use of assignments and non-pure functions are certainly (at least for me) *NOT* lambda languages.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom