Hi Haskellers,
personally, I'd prefer to use a kind of labeled fields notation at the
point where the function is called, like:
addBase{?base=7} 5
In recursive calls, this notation would then be optional, of course.
If a function should be called multiple times with the same
value of the
Ch. A. Herrmann proposed:
| addBase{?base=7} 5
I like this! It is the least polluting syntax of all.
/Koen.
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Ashley Yakeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
At 2002-02-03 15:34, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:
The main disadvantage of this solution is that, in
Haskell, some keywords (`let', `case', `where', and `do')
trigger the layout rule and now `dynamic' or `nonrec'
would have to trigger the
[Resent with permission of author -=chak]
I'm beginning to find implicit parameters *extremely* useful, so I think it's
important to get this right. I have some code that will have to change, but not
as much as I will have in a couple of years...!
I find adding a keyword to implicit parameter
At 2002-02-04 01:45, Koen Claessen wrote:
| addBase{?base=7} 5
I like this! It is the least polluting syntax of all.
Hmm... you have braces without following a keyword. I think in all other
cases, braces follow a keyword (where, let, do, of).
--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 01:33:54PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
At 2002-02-04 01:45, Koen Claessen wrote:
| addBase{?base=7} 5
I like this! It is the least polluting syntax of all.
Hmm... you have braces without following a keyword. I think in all other
cases, braces follow a keyword
Hi all,
How about the following syntax:
(addBase 5 | ?base = 10)
This is quite unlike from other binding constructs in Haskell,
so maybe something more similar to list comprehension
would be better:
(addBase 5 | ?base - 10)
Cheers,
Sebastien
Dear Haskell Folks,
I am sure you are fully aware that the most painful
decisions that a language designer has to make are those
concerning the syntax of the language. Earth shattering
disputes have been fought over the syntax of programming
languages with equals only in arguments over the
At 2002-02-03 15:34, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:
The main disadvantage of this solution is that, in
Haskell, some keywords (`let', `case', `where', and `do')
trigger the layout rule and now `dynamic' or `nonrec'
would have to trigger the layout rule, but *only* when
appearing after
