Folks
On 1 Feb 2008, at 22:19, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's a matter of taste. I prefer the function composition in this
case.
It reads nicely as a pipeline.
-- Lennart
Dan L :
On Fri, Feb 1, 2008 at 9:48 PM, Dan Licata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not to start a flame war or religious debate, but I don't think that
eta-expansions should be considered bad style.
Cale:
> > nest :: [(r -> a) -> a] -> ([r] -> a) -> a
> > nest xs = runCont (sequence (map Cont xs))
>
Derek:
> This is what you write after all that time on #haskell?
>
> nest = runCont . sequence . map Cont
Pardon my voodoo (apologies to libraries readers,
but here we go again, slightly updated).
With these useful general purpose goodies...
> module Newtype where
> import Data.Monoid
> class Newtype p u | p -> u where
> unpack :: p -> u
> instance Newtype p u => Newtype (a -> p) (a -> u) where
> unpack = (unpack .)
> op :: Newtype p u => (u -> p) -> p -> u
> op _ p = unpack p
> wrap :: Newtype p u => (x -> y) ->(y -> p) -> x -> u
> wrap pack f = unpack . f . pack
> ala :: Newtype p' u' => (u -> p) ->
> ((a -> p) -> b -> p') ->
> (a -> u) -> b -> u'
> ala pack hitWith = wrap (pack .) hitWith
...and the suitable Newtype instance for Cont, I
get to write...
nest = ala Cont traverse id
..separating the newtype encoding from what's really
going on, fusing the map with the sequence, and
generalizing to any old Traversable structure.
Third-order: it's a whole other order.
Conor
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
