funq: syntax that doesn't scare off C++ developers

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Friday, July 25, 2014 12:18:22 Ivan Čukić wrote:
> Aaron said that we don't want to be totally pure, but in that case we need
> to make a distinction between pure parts and impure ones. If we can count
> on f in above example to be pure, then we can do a graph redux and evaluate
> f(x) only once. (which would make the above examples equivalent.

That's a very good point and indeed in this area the language should be 
'purely' functional. 

So, clarification  time: assignment doesn't return a true/false but results in 
success/failure. On success you have the literal value of the variable (since 
it _is_ that value) and on failure you get an error.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://kde.org/pipermail/funq-devel/attachments/20140725/a4d8a467/attachment.sig>