Content deleted Content added
→Clarity: re |
→Clarity: re |
||
Line 746:
:: In my opinion your suggestion is more confusing and less accurate than the current wording. Operationally, a closure is a data structure pairing a function (reference/pointer) with an table (the referencing environment). See for example the definition by Sussman and Steele given in the first footnote. This is a fairly unambiguous and precise definition (given that you know what a referencing environment is, what necessarily has the be explained in the following sentences.) Your proposed definition on the other hand uses the rather vague and imprecise "a closure ... is the scope of a function". Semantically, a closure has everything to do with scoping, of course, but this is what the sentences following the first try to explain. I therefore think it's only useful to whole first paragraph, not just the first sentence. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 21:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
:: I do think that the final part of the first sentence ("for the non-local variables of that function.") needs to be clarified. In particular it might be possible to give a definition of "referencing environment" instead. Something along the lines of "a map containing [[name binding|binding]]s for the [[non-local variable]]s of that function."?—''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 21:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
| |||