From: Jim Pryor Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 06:29:16 +0000 (-0400) Subject: tweak advanced X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=b4c014e6ecfc5d1f90749ba511711066539c0d09 tweak advanced Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor --- diff --git a/miscellaneous_lambda_challenges_and_advanced_topics.mdwn b/miscellaneous_lambda_challenges_and_advanced_topics.mdwn index 1289713c..ea07a841 100644 --- a/miscellaneous_lambda_challenges_and_advanced_topics.mdwn +++ b/miscellaneous_lambda_challenges_and_advanced_topics.mdwn @@ -303,13 +303,13 @@ can use. What if the way we implemented the search procedure looked something like this? At a given stage in the search, we wouldn't just apply some function `f` to the - head at this stage and the result accumulated so far, from folding the same - function (and a base value) to the tail at this stage...and then pass the result - of doing so leftward along the rest of the list. + head at this stage and the result accumulated so far (from folding the same + function, and a base value, to the tail at this stage)...and then pass the result + of that application to the embedding, more leftward computation. - We'd *instead* give that function a "handler" that expected the result of the - current stage *as an argument*, and evaluated to passing that result leftwards - along the rest of the list. + We'd *instead* give `f` a "handler" that expects the result of the current + stage *as an argument*, and then evaluates to what you'd get by passing that + result leftwards up the list, as before. Why would we do that, you say? Just more flamboyant lifting?