From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <09650C1A-A4C8-4030-81D6-9AC8913970A2@kix.in> References: <09650C1A-A4C8-4030-81D6-9AC8913970A2@kix.in> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 14:32:02 +0200 Message-ID: <5d375e920909020532p1c3bd46l75d89db4f224301e@mail.gmail.com> From: Uriel To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [9fans] "Blocks" in C Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5e4967e0-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Anant Narayanan wrote: > Mac OS 10.6 introduced a new C compiler frontend (clang), which added > support for "blocks" in C [1]. Blocks basically add closures and anonymous > functions to C (and it's derivatives). Full details with examples are in the > linked article. I think the feature is quite elegant and might be useful in > cases where you want map/reduce like functionality in C. Er., I might be more dumb than usual, but why on earth would you need/want this garbage to get map/reduce functionality in C? To me it seems the typical "lets come up with some cute 'feature' and then we will figure out how to hype ourselves all the way to hell". Peace uriel > > How much effort would it be to support a feature similar to blocks in 8c > (and family)? What are your thoughts on the idea in general? > > -- > Anant > > [1] http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/10 > >