Revision as of 07:13, 26 June 2008 edit Tea2min (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 21,977 edits →Intro is too confusing and inaccurate: Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:12, 4 September 2008 edit undo RobertGary1 (talk \| contribs) 247 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 567: I don't believe the cited article, taken in context, supports the statement that closures are a better alternative to objects. It seems to say, instead, that closures and objects each have their appropriate place. If there are no objections, I will remove the second half of the following statement: "Closures can be used to implement object systems [2], and may in fact be better alternatives to objects [3]." --[[User:Akellymi\|Akellymi]] ([[User talk:Akellymi\|talk]]) 16:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC) ==Etomology== I'm trying to figure out what the etomology of the word "closure" is in this context. Is this a Lisp started term? --[[User:RobertGary1\|RobertGary1]] ([[User talk:RobertGary1\|talk]]) 23:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Closure (computer programming): Difference between revisions