closures

I would like to start organizing my code properly, so I want to use object literals. In the following case, I'm doing a pseudo class. I would like that init() could work as a constructor, but unfortunately, I'm not seeing how to set attributes based on object context. var car = { context : this, wheels : 0, color : '', speed : 0, init : (function(x){ console.log(x); x.wheels = 4; x.color = 'red'; x.speed = 120; })(context) }; console.log(car.color); You can't immediately run a function like that whilst declaring an object literal. What you can do: var car = { init : function(wheels,color,speed

My goal is to make a function (specifically, floodfill) that works independent of the underlying data structure. I tried to do this by passing in two closures: one for querying, that borrows some data immutably, and another for mutating, that borrows the same data mutably. Example (tested on the Rust Playground ): #![feature(nll)] fn foo<F, G>(n: i32, closure: &F, mut_closure: &mut G) where F: Fn(i32) -> bool, G: FnMut(i32) -> (), { if closure(n) { mut_closure(n); } } fn main() { let mut data = 0; let closure = |n| data == n; let mut mut_closure = |n| { data += n; }; foo(0, &closure, &mut mut

So, another SO question prompted me to try the following: object Foo{ def f = 1 } sc.parallelize(List(1)).map(x=>{ val myF = Foo.f _ x + myF() } Which works, but the following does not: object Foo{ def f = 1 def run(rdd: org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD[Int]) = rdd.map(x=>{ val myF = Foo.f _ x + myF() } } Foo.run(sc.parallelize(List(1))) I will take a deeper look at the serialization stack tomorrow when I can remove the mess of the REPL output. But, this should be the same thing. Why does one way yell and the other does not. 来源： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29762964/task-not-serializable-when

I apologize in advance for yet another closure question, but I'd like to clarify my understanding of the way closures are implemented in JavaScript. Consider the following code: 01 'use strict'; 02 function foo() {} 03 foo(); I have established in a question earlier in the year that a closure is conceptually (if not actually due to engine optimizations) created here. And until foo is invoked on line 3 a corresponding execution context is not created. So as far as I can tell from the spec, when evaluating this code: Each execution context has a "LexicalEnvironment" component used to resolve

I am trying to see if I can use structs for my model and was trying this. When I call vm.testClosure() , it does not change the value of x and I am not sure why. struct Model { var x = 10.0 } var m = Model() class ViewModel { let testClosure:() -> () init(inout model: Model) { testClosure = { () -> () in model.x = 30.5 } } } var vm = ViewModel(model:&m) m.x vm.testClosure() m.x An inout argument isn't a reference to a value type – it's simply a shadow copy of that value type, that is written back to the caller's value when the function returns. What's happening in your code is that your inout

I've read a number of other questions about Access to Modified closure so I understand the basic principle. Still, I couldn't tell - does Parallel.ForEach have the same issues? Take the following snippet where I recompute the usage stats for users for the last week as an example: var startTime = DateTime.Now; var endTime = DateTime.Now.AddHours(6); for (var i = 0; i < 7; i++) { // this next line gives me "Access To Modified Closure" Parallel.ForEach(allUsers, user => UpdateUsageStats(user, startTime, endTime)); // move back a day and continue the process startTime = startTime.AddDays(-1);