Is there any way to do it? If not, then I'm thinking, since "body" is already a keyword, you could just use that:

h(function int ( int i ) { if ( i == 0 ) return i;
return i + body( i-1);
   });

If that becomes adopted, it might also be good to encourage the use of "body" for recursions in general; it's like a big red flag that says "I recurse!", which could be handy in functions so large that you temporarily forget their names while reading them. ;-)

I think it would be better to just name it!

"James Widman" <james@jwidman.com> wrote in message news:james-CD365A.13185322042004@digitalmars.com...
> Is there any way to do it? If not, then I'm thinking, since "body" is already a keyword, you could just use that:
>
> h(function int ( int i ) { if ( i == 0 ) return i;
> return i + body( i-1);
>    });
>
> If that becomes adopted, it might also be good to encourage the use of "body" for recursions in general; it's like a big red flag that says "I recurse!", which could be handy in functions so large that you temporarily forget their names while reading them. ;-)

I'm strange, but I like it.  Then again I'm also of the opinion that there ought to be a 'pass()' statement for recursing into the superclass.  A la:

class Foo {
  int somefunc(int x) { ... }
}

class Bar {
  override int somefunc(int x) {
    if (x == SOME_SPECIAL_CASE)
      // ... do stuff
    pass(x); // used to be: super.somefunc(x)
  }
}

I think pass() and body() would make nice siblings.

-C. Sauls
-Invironz

James Widman wrote:
> Is there any way to do it? If not, then I'm thinking, since "body" is already a keyword, you could just use that: 
> 
> h(function int ( int i ) { if ( i == 0 ) return i; return i + body( i-1);    });
> 
> If that becomes adopted, it might also be good to encourage the use of "body" for recursions in general; it's like a big red flag that says "I recurse!", which could be handy in functions so large that you temporarily forget their names while reading them. ;-)