Docorator Disected

[Ron_Adam]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 08:37:02 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis"
<martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:

>Ron_Adam wrote:
>>>Ah, so you did not know functions are objects just like numbers,
>>>strings or dictionaries. I think you may have been influenced by other
>>>languages where there is a concept of static declaration of functions.
>> 
>> 
>> No, I did not know that you could pass multiple sets of arguments to
>> nested defined functions in that manner.  
>
>Please read the statements carefully, and try to understand the mental
>model behind them. He did not say that you can pass around multiple
>sets of arguments. He said that functions (not function calls, but
>the functions themselves) are objects just like numbers. There is
>a way of "truly" understanding this notion, and I would encourage
>you to try doing so.

Hello Martin,

It is interesting how sometimes what we already know, and a new
situation presented in an indirect way, can lead us to viewing an
isolated situation in a biased way.

That's pretty much the situation I've experienced here with this one
point. I already knew that functions are objects, and objects can be
passed around.  My mind just wasn't clicking on this particular set of
conditions for some reason, probably because I was looking too closely
at the problem. 

(Starting off as a tech, with knowledge of how microchips work, can
sometimes be a obstacle when programming in high level languages.)

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's had difficulties with this.  But
I'm somewhat disappointed in myself for not grasping the concept as it
is, in this particular context, a bit sooner.     

Cheers,
Ron


>Regards,
>Martin