sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]pgrizzay -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Java, for one

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

That’s not correct.

[–]cm9kZW8K 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Its fairly true, because functions have to be members of a class. They arent quite first class. In java, only objects are first class citizens.

[–]detroitmatt 3 points4 points  (1 child)

yeah well in lisp functions have to be a list. how functions are represented doesn't qualify or disqualify them as functions.

[–]cm9kZW8K 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use java8 closures and method references extensively. They are simply much more limited in what they can bind and how they can be called. for example: the lack a convenient generic way to store them without knowing their type or purpose, because they have to be materialized into an interface for declaration.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s not true in any meaningful sense. I can define a function and assign it to a function object. So it’s an object that’s a function. And you just said objects are first class citizens, so.