[Haskell-cafe] Re: Higher-order algorithms

[Heinrich Apfelmus]

Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
> Most of the well-known algorithms are first-order, in the sense that
> their input and output are "plain" data.
> Some are second-order in a trivial way, for example sorting,
> hashtables or the map and fold functions: they are parameterized by a
> function, but they don't really do anything interesting with it except
> invoke it on pieces of other input data.
> 
> [...]
>
> For example, parser combinators are not so interesting: they are a
> bunch of relatively orthogonal (by their purpose) combinators, each of
> which is by itself quite trivial, plus not-quite-higher-order
> backtracking at the core.

Aww, and there I thought that a famous function of 6th order for 
combining parsers would be to your liking:

     Chris Okasaki.
     Even Higher-Order Functions for Parsing  or
        Why Would Anyone Ever Want To Use a Sixth-Order Function?
     http://www.eecs.usma.edu/webs/people/okasaki/jfp98.ps


Regards,
Heinrich Apfelmus

--
http://apfelmus.nfshost.com