Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarations

Marco van de Voort <marcov@stack.nl>
13 Oct 2003 00:26:56 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat lsantil@calstatela.edu (Louis Paul Santillan) (2003-10-06)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat haberg@matematik.su.se (2003-10-06)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-10-06)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat geoff@wozniak.ca (Geoff Wozniak) (2003-10-08)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-10-08)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2003-10-13)
Re: Questions about anonymous functions and classes/functions declarat marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2003-10-13)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Marco van de Voort <marcov@stack.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 13 Oct 2003 00:26:56 -0400
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
References: 03-10-004 03-10-028
Keywords: OOP
Posted-Date: 13 Oct 2003 00:26:56 EDT

> "Gabriele Farina" <mrfaro@libero.it> wrote:
>
> If one wants dynamically definable functions, then that is probably
> one the way of implementing a functional language interpreter. One
> then implements functional closures, that can be combined either via
> compiled code, or by other runtime structures that knows how to
> combine them.


Didn't have Objective C runtime extensable classes?

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.