* John Wiegley <jo...@fpcomplete.com> [2013-09-10 04:48:36-0500] > >>>>> Niklas Hambüchen <m...@nh2.me> writes: > > > Code written in cucumber syntax is concise and easy to read > > concise |kənˈsīs|, adj. > > giving a lot of information clearly and in a few words; brief but > comprehensive. > > Compare: > > Scenario: Defining the function foldl > Given I want do define foldl > Which has the type (in brackets) a to b to a (end of brackets), > to a, to list of b, to a > And my arguments are called f, acc, and l > When l is empty > Then the result better be acc > Otherwise l is x cons xs > Then the result should be foldl f (in brackets) f acc x > (end of brackets) xs > > To: > > foldl :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> [b] -> a > foldl f z [] = z > foldl f z (x:xs) = foldl f (f z x) xs > > How is that more concise or preferable?
I thought it was a joke. Roman
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
