Hi guys,
One argument for the current policy is to claim that next and
embedInStream should describe similar sequences.
Function:embedInStream needs to return the function rather than its
value. If not, patterns could not define sequences
of functions.
Of course, embedInStream defines a one element sequence while next
returns an infinite sequence, so 'next'
and 'embedInStream' are already different.
And Functions cannot embed other Streams (you need a Routine), so
it is already a special case.
I find it tempting....
RJK
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:45 AM, James Harkins wrote:
I think next should do the same thing as value against functions.
Among other benefits, you wouldn't need to write Pfunc() all the
time.
Pbind(\freq, { ...})
That would make some things a whole lot easier for me.
hjh
On Dec 18, 2007 10:27 AM, Scott Wilson <i@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is there a reason why Function:next should not be a synonym for
'value'? (Something to do with the need for FuncStream?)
I've just come across the issue of when next and value are really
interchangeable in a chapter for the book.
Similarly, Function:asStream returns the function itself.
--
James Harkins /// dewdrop world
jamshark70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.dewdrop-world.net
"Come said the Muse,
Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
Sing me the universal." -- Whitman
_______________________________________________
Sc-devel mailing list
Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel
_______________________________________________
Sc-devel mailing list
Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel