From: Erik Veenstra <google@...>
Date: 2006-02-09T02:18:22+09:00
Subject: Re: Meta-Meta-Programming

> How is the term "monitor-functions" you have used in this
> thread different from the standard "higher-order functions,"
> if you don't mind my asking?

A monitor-function isn't a higher-order function, since it
takes the name of a method, not the method itself. Nor does it
_return_ a function. Well, it does _create_ a new function as a
side effect, but that's not part of the definition of
higher-order functions. Higher-order functions are used in
Lisp. In functional programming (that's what you try to do in
Lisp) side-effects are considered bad. In OO (Ruby) it's
considered common. (Although monitor-functions are not
OO'ish...)

Module#wrap_method, used in the implementation of a
monitor-function, is a higher-order function: It takes a block.

So, the relation between monitor-functions and higher-order
functions that does exist, is invisible to the user of a
monitor-function.

gegroet,
Erik V. - http://www.erikveen.dds.nl/