Re: User-reserved element in byte code vectors

[Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>]

On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 09:45:43AM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
>     I think paying one extra word for each and every closure ever created
>     from now on, just because of the remote possibility that someone will
>     want something like rcurry and will want it to be really efficient and
>     that someone will not prefer some other implementation....
> 
> We're talking about currying--what does that have to do with
> closures?  There is some similarity between the two, but I don't
> think we want to use `curry' to implement closures.
> It seems to me that if we add any facility for closures
> we might as well make it a primitive that does precisely closures.

For what sort of closures?  This currying implementation originated with the
closures in my lexical-binding implementation -- _after_ I had implemented
the mechanism for doing closures, I realized that it was precisely the same
as the currying operator, and so now I called it that, as that's a more
interesting operation in standard emacs.  But it's the same thing as closures
for me (not just similar, the same).

Do you some sort of closure implementation in mind that's necessarily
different?

-Miles
-- 
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
  --Albert Einstein