Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] really HO Functions
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: John Prevost <j.prevost@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] really HO Functions
On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:02:52 +0300, Radu Grigore <> wrote:
> I am learning OCaml now. The last two-three days I've written a small
> prototype; then I have reviewed it and one of the observations was
> that it contains no second-order function.
> Possible reasons:
> 1. higher order functions are hard (intellectually unmanageable)
> 2. HOFs are not needed in practice above a certain order
> 3. failure to recognize places where a HOF is needed (beyond the
> standard examples in tutorial).
> Number 3 was what prompted me to ask the question: a few examples
> always help. Unfortunately I didn't yet had time to read the cited
> articles :(.

I highly recommend keeping at it and joining the beginners list (if
you haven't already).  Making and using higher-order (as in 2nd or
3rd, at least) functions is one of those things that you start doing
after you've been using a functional language for a while.  It does
dramatically simplify your life when you start doing it, but it's not
immediately obvious how you'll use it.

Really, this is why people should try to gain experience with a
variety of languages: it greatly expands the variety of techniques
that you think of when trying to solve a problem.  The experience will
impact how you program in every language, whether or not it has those

In any case, good luck!

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: