Re: Nested Functions alternative?

[Carlo de Falco]

On 21 Jun 2009, at 22:18, Jason Carver wrote:

> Since Octave doesn't support nested functions, is there a suggested  
> alternative for closures of non-trivial method size?
>
> For example, I want to do something like this:
>
> function f = sophisticated_func_many_args(arg2,arg3,arg4)
>   function ans = sophisticated_func_one_arg(arg1)
>     #do something with args 1-4 for several lines
>     #set answer
>   end
>   f = @sophisticated_func_one_arg
> end
>
> one_arg_func = sophisticated_func_many_args(2,3,4)
> result = built_in_library_call(one_arg_func)

maybe I'm missing the point here, but wouldn't

function f = sophisticated_func_many_args (arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4)
  #do something with args 1-4 for several lines
  #set answer
endfunction

result = built_in_library_call(@(arg1) sophisticated_func_many_args  
(arg1,2,3,4))

do what you want?

> This situation is particularly relevant when a library requires a  
> single-argument function passed in (eg~ ode45).  Maybe I'm just  
> spoiled with python lately, but I don't even see the imperative  
> workaround for this anymore.  What is the suggested alternative for  
> this pattern in Octave?
>
> Cheers,
> Carver


HTH,
c.