Super! - thank Alex. On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 11:17 AM Alexander Burger <picolisp@software-lab.de> wrote:
> Hi Kashyap, > > > Does this look like a reasonable way to create the "create-adder" > function? > > > > (de create-adder Args > > (let > > (N (car Args) > > Adder (intern (pack "add-" N)) > > P > > (list > > 'de > > Adder > > '(X) > > (list '+ N 'X) ) ) > > (eval P) ) ) > > > > : (create-adder 10) > > -> add-10 > > : (add-10 20) > > -> 30 > > Yes, but you can do it a little simpler by directly calling 'def': > > (de create-adder (N) > (def (intern (pack "add-" N)) > (list '(X) (list '+ N 'X)) ) ) > > Note also that I use (N), i.e. an evaluated argument, as this makes the > function > more general. > > > Even simpler if you use 'curry': > > (de create-adder (@N) > (def (intern (pack "add-" @N)) > (curry (@N) (X) > (+ @N X) ) ) ) > > It is especially simpler if the function body, which is here just (+ N X), > is > more complicated, because then the 'list'ing and 'cons'ing of the body > would > become very unreadable. > > > > If I understand correctly, the "macro" capability of miniPicoLisp is not > at > > par with PicoLisp right? > > The 'macro' function of mini and normal PicoLisp is the same I think. > > ☺/ A!ex > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe >
