On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter / googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> It seems that in times of excessive CPU capacity and multiple cores
> people turn to features which give more dynamic as well as easier
> implementation of concurrent applications (no synchronization needed
> when going strict functional). =A0Amazing that Lisp is one of the oldest
> languages around still in use and its family seems to be prepared to
> finally reach mainstream. :-)

I think the same thing is happening with closures, but we haven't
gotten as far. It's still possible to promulgate a language like Java
that doesn't have practical closures. At the time I started writing,
Python didn't have closures at all and I heard Guido van Rossum say
that they weren't important. I think that's wrong, and that in another
thirty years people will laugh at anyone who tries to invent a
language without closures, just as they'll laugh now at anyone who
tries to invent a language without recursion.

-- Mark Jason Dominus, in an interview on "Higher Order Perl"

http://www.theperlreview.com/Interviews/mjd-hop-20050407.html

martin

>
> Cheers
>
> robert
>
> --
> remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
> http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
>
>