In other words, can we model many to many relationships in a persistent data structure efficiently? A pair of unidirectional multimaps was suggested. However, I\'m not sure how this would work well
At this point in time I am approaching the 1800 line mark in my code. It contains a series of different forms and one big function which checks, validates, and determines the next step in the proces
one thing that I find fascinating about Haskell is how functions and variables are the same. In most languages a variable holds a value while a function does something and then, eventually, returns a
I want to find in some Iterable some elements that both conform to some given type, and validates a predicate taking that type as an argument.
I would like to access a random member of a tuple and I\'m not sure how to set #n to a variable. Here is my code:
I am defining a function that takes as input a function and I want to specify it in the input type i.e. Operat[_?FunctionQ]:=...
This is somewhat related to Does functional programming replace GoF design patterns? Since the introduction of lambdas and dynamics in C#, are there any of the standard design patterns that could be
It could very well be that the answer to this question is an obvious and resounding \"there\'s no such thing\", but I\'ll give it a shot: Is there a functional map-like data structure that is more eff
I\'m trying to solve this problem. I was wondering if someone would help get started on it or give me some hints.
In a purely functional language, couldn\'t one still define an \"assignment\" operator, say, \"<-\", such that the command, say, \"i <- 3\", instead of directly assigning the immutable variable
加载中,请稍侯......