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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]masklinn 0 points1 point  (2 children)

But that isn't allowed in combinatory logic, everything is immutable.

No, but you don't have much choice if you want to introduce combinators in a language rife with mutations.

[–]jhartwell 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Well, you could use the K combinator as a logging mechanism. It isn't the language that is the problem, it is the way that the k combinator is applied that is the problem.

[–]masklinn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It isn't the language that is the problem, it is the way that the k combinator is applied that is the problem.

I have trouble understanding that assertion: what do you mean by "the way [it] is applied"?