On 12/27/07, Cristian Baboi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-class_object > > The term was coined by Christopher Strachey in the context of "functions > as first-class citizens" in the mid-1960's.[1] > > Depending on the language, this can imply: > 1. being expressible as an anonymous literal value > 2. being storable in variables > 3. being storable in data structures > 4. having an intrinsic identity (independent of any given name) > 5. being comparable for equality with other entities > 6. being passable as a parameter to a procedure/function > 7. being returnable as the result of a procedure/function > 8. being constructable at runtime > 9. being printable > 10. being readable > 11. being transmissible among distributed processes > 12. being storable outside running processes > > I'll guess that 5,9,12 does not apply to Haskell functions. >
I don't think this is meant as a list of requirements, but as examples of what being first class *can* mean. So yes, in Haskell some of these points don't make much sense. -- Sebastian Sylvan +44(0)7857-300802 UIN: 44640862 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
