Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!csrd.uiuc.edu!sp64.csrd.uiuc.edu!bliss
From: bliss@sp64.csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: composition of functions
Keywords: composition, function, first-class object
Message-ID: <1991Feb13.212250.27437@csrd.uiuc.edu>
Date: 13 Feb 91 21:22:50 GMT
References: <1991Feb8.191014.6430@spool.cs.wisc.edu> <6828:Feb906:14:3491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Feb11.162041.9889@spool.cs.wisc.edu> <28712:Feb1201:08:5691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <17619@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com>
Sender: news@csrd.uiuc.edu (news)
Reply-To: bliss@sp64.csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Organization: Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Lines: 24



>Reading all the flamage about composable functions, I am forced to
>note that everyone appears to agree:
	(1) Functions are not first-class objects in C
	(2) Composition is a difficult notion to express in C.
>The disagreements are on the subject of whether this problem is a
>major failing in the language.

1) i agree with.

2)
   say you have two functions,

   int f (int x);
   int g (int x);

   what's so hard about writing:

   int fg (int x) { return (f(g(x)); }

 ???????????????????

 bb