From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <vincent.aravantinos@yahoo.fr>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE 
	autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D72BEBC6B
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 23 May 2007 13:02:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com (smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com [217.12.11.33])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l4NB2eSu018932
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 23 May 2007 13:02:40 +0200
Received: (qmail 26272 invoked from network); 23 May 2007 11:02:40 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.fr;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Mime-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Subject:Date:To:X-Mailer;
  b=t7gPmK6YymaQMTQR3FtAGEPbSPmY9/gsbuoQo0/fs9rgmGiitp0wTbTBmFWOrGKqUYMOSNsK53hN+SDpmRcYW+gwIVDAKq1x2rIAnIFtebTBnwrfw6bsg2tZQgcIwbsKB6LXjyxiicMLQCEop21neAdpFAz1dqW2r/KIgDyQaPY=  ;
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.10?) (vincent.aravantinos@82.229.199.66 with plain)
  by smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 May 2007 11:02:40 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 4d2muOoVM1nfYFhavXmIS5L7QZOgVLrMLisnC6jC5svAZP0Y
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <20070523100002.6B193BC73@yquem.inria.fr>
References: <20070523100002.6B193BC73@yquem.inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <3A6A724D-68A1-4D21-8EF8-7B39F64110E6@yahoo.fr>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@yahoo.fr>
Subject: Re: Re: Teaching bottomline, part 3: what should improve.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 13:00:51 +0200
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46541F50.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 beginner's:01 2007,:98 wrote:01 imho:01 functions:01 functions:01 surprising:01 match:02 programming:03 context:04 fold:06 wed:06 programmer:06 indeed:07 

On Wed, 23 May 2007, Loup Vaillant wrote :

> (...)

>> * Anonymous functions are still beyond most of them.
>
> That sounds surprising, for anonymous function are no different  
> from named ones:
>
> 5;; (* a value *)
> fun x -> x+1;; (* another value, which happens to be a function *)

Those are typically the comments of a "used-to-functional- 
programming" guy.
It certainly doesn't match what a beginner would think (no beginner  
will call a
function a "value").

Or do you really think that seeing functions as first-class object is  
the natural way ?
IMHO this is not the case, and therefore not the case of a beginner.

To my eyes, there are (I mean, "in human mind" or at least in an  
ocaml beginner's mind)
values AND functions. A function turns into a value (in the mind of  
the programmer)
only when it is used by a higher order function.

> a = 5;; (* a bound value *)
> b = fun x -> x+1;; (* another bound value, which happens to be a  
> function *)
>
> Did your students used map and fold-like functions much? These almost
> require anonymous functions.

Indeed, using map and fold puts the focus on the fact that functions  
_can_ be values.
Thus their importance in a pedagogical context.

Maybe all this is just a matter of belief...

Regards,
Vincent