Why does val need indirection for functions? about closkell HOT 3 CLOSED

Neat language by the way! The idea of variables that look like functions reminds me of this discussion, and inheritance reminds me a bit of Pyret.

from closkell.

Oh sorry, I was not able to see this issue in time but here I finally somehow got my eye on it. About the indirection, it is in no way needed but this is how curry keyword does it, so in order to meet the exact semantic for explanation purposes, I decided to write it this way in the documentation.

The curry keyword is supposed to define a regular "function variable"(I just mean a lambda attached to a "variable") since variables are themselves functions it just followed that functions inside variables would be functions inside functions. So to paraphrase it was done for consistency's sake.

Also, I see that you mentioned Pyret which was a huge inspiration for this language thus having a similar inheritance model and sum types.

from closkell.

I see, makes sense.

That's cool that you had Pyret in mind when thinking about the design! I guess the world of PLs designed for education is still relatively small.

from closkell.