From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60AE9BBAF for ; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:28:06 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmoAAJbTQEhCbwQZlGdsb2JhbACSMQEBAQEJAwoHEQSbIg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,570,1204498800"; d="scan'208";a="13301667" Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 31 May 2008 13:27:44 +0200 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95A6F110EC2; Sat, 31 May 2008 07:27:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 31 May 2008 07:27:42 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: bewoqekIMn3aD+m2tpOzamEqhwARWkEWMD8ch1gRiHxb 1212233262 Received: from [192.168.1.10] (ALyon-157-1-122-196.w90-42.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.42.17.196]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CBD7925A14; Sat, 31 May 2008 07:27:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 13:24:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Martin Jambon X-X-Sender: martin@martin.ec.wink.com To: Fabrice Marchant Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Compose function for multiple parameters ? In-Reply-To: <20080531101042.25d046ee@free.fr> Message-ID: References: <20080531092406.093bd147@free.fr> <20080531101042.25d046ee@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam: no; 0.00; ens-lyon:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 jambon:01 jambon:01 parameters:03 parameters:03 function:08 function:08 fabrice:08 compose:08 compose:08 cleaner:09 martin:13 martin:13 On Sat, 31 May 2008, Fabrice Marchant wrote: >> It would be cooler to write the later on the basis of : >> (( <<- ) (( <<- ) f)) g > > Sorry, I just discover that this is cleaner : > (( <<- ) <<- ( <<- )) > > and extendable to any number of parameters. > > (( <<- ) <<- ( <<- ) <<- ( <<- )) > to compose with a 3 parameters function. Personally, I call this obfuscated, not clean. Martin -- http://wink.com/profile/mjambon http://mjambon.com