Re: [Vala] anonymous functions

["Jared Moore" <jaredm gmx com>]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Sam Liddicott <sam liddicott com> wrote:
> * Sam Liddicott wrote, On 15/07/08 10:15:
> > I find this notation ugly:
> >
> >                 notify += (s, p) => {
> >                         stdout.printf("property `%s' has changed!\n",
> >                                       p.name);
> >                 };
> >
> >
> > Is there a reason why the => should be required?
> >
> >                 notify += (s, p) {
> >                         stdout.printf("property `%s' has changed!\n",
> >                                       p.name);
> >                 };
> >
> >
> > seems a lot more natural, all that's missing is the name cos there isn't
> > one...
> >
> > Does the => signifiy anything particular?

I don't know for sure, but my guess is that it makes parsing and parse
error recovery easier. It is also similar to the lambda expression
syntax in C#, which Vala's syntax is based on.

> >
> And in the advanced example:
> http://live.gnome.org/Vala/AdvancedSample
>
>
> what does the s signify in
>
>        this.foo += s => {
>            stdout.printf ("Lambda expression %s!\n", name);
>        };

's' is the formal parameter of the function, just like s and p are
formal parameters in the first example. You could put parentheses
around it if you like, but you don't need to because in that case
there's only one parameter.

> Thanks
>
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> Vala-list mailing list
> Vala-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list