From: Daniel Wallin (dalwan01_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-01 15:22:27
Max Khesin wrote:
[snip]
> and by extension
> bind(f, _1, _2, _0)(x, y, z)
> would be equivalent to
> f(x, y)
I don't get it, what is _0 here? AFAICT
bind(f, _1, _2)(x, y, z)
is already the equivalent of
f(x, y)
-- Daniel Wallin