Greets -
[ Better late than never. ]
Ran across this thread while perusing list trying to figure out whether
to join or not. In the interest of sharing info with the great
collective unconscious (i.e. Internet), thought I'd include part of my
.vimrc so that Vim users (and others considering the
matt hellige [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would
PREFER if haskell enforeced a strict distinction between spaces and
tabs for layout purposes, i.e., this:
let x = y
^I z = q
^Iw = l
in ...
should be an error.
Simon¹ is usually very positive to adding enhancements, if this really
[Glynn Clements [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Peter wrote:
Currently, I expand tabs to 4 spaces only, so
\tx=bar
looks like
foo = bar
to me when the compiler sees
foo = bar
If you want to go the layout way perhaps someone/you could put in a compiler
matt hellige wrote:
there seems to be an awfully strong bias against using hard tabs with
a configurable displayed width. i'd like to describe a situation where
i believe that option makes a lot of sense... suppose you're working
on a team of programmers on a project, and you need to come up
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Ingo Wechsung wrote:
Beg your pardon, Marcin
But they are compatible because there is one most universally accepted
interpretation of a tab (move to the next multiple of 8 columns). Any
other interpretation hampers portability and should be avoided.
No. It didn't
G'day all.
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 05:40:28PM +0100, Ingo Wechsung wrote:
No. It didn't hamper portability with C, Java, Perl or any other *nix stuff
since more than 30 years except with COBOL, Python (?) and Haskell, [...]
Add to that: Fortran, Occam and Makefiles. There's probably also a
John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rather than start layout blocks right after the 'let' 'do' or 'where',
put them on the next line with one more tabstop than the current
line.
I've also a bit baffled by all the people apparently struggling with
layout; I realize the rules are a bit
Wether spaces or tabs are better in source files is a matter of taste and
a language should not force me to use one or another.
Well note that it doesn't only confuse compilers: if you post code for
other people to read (whose display software has their personal own
interpretation of what a
Andrew wrote:
My remark was merely in response to the claim that Haskell cares
whether you put tabs or spaces in your files. It does not, so long
as the tabs are of length 8. If your editor produces tabs of a
different size, that's a problem with your editor or the way you
dislike Haskell's
When I got somebody else's C-Code, I used gnu indent to bring
it into a layout I liked (and could easily grasp).
One of the points I like about Haskell is just its use of
space: it makes things clearer and doesn't clutter up your screen
as it does in C. I definitely had less problems with layout
Ingo Wechsung [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon wrote:
There's no reason not to use 8 column tab stops, so please don't do it.
Ok, if it just looks better to me is no reason,
Tabs and spaces aren't visually distinguishable, so I'm not sure why
you conclude that looks don't matter.
As has
Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:09:46 +0100, Ingo Wechsung [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
No. My editor produces the ASCII code for horizontal tab, when I
hit the tab key. Just as it produces the ASCII code for a when I
hit the a key.
That's how it should be.
It shouln't, becase tabs are 8 spaces, which is
Ingo == Ingo Wechsung [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ingo Or, to turn it another way: What you see is not necessarily
Ingo what you get. This may be fine for ad hoc scripts that one
Ingo examines in hugs.
So is that the language's fault (because of what you get) or the
editor's fault
Kevin,
thanks for your helpfull comments.
Ingo Or, to turn it another way: What you see is not necessarily
Ingo what you get. This may be fine for ad hoc scripts that one
Ingo examines in hugs.
So is that the language's fault (because of what you get) or the
editor's fault (because
From: Ingo Wechsung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Currently, I expand tabs to 4 spaces only, so
\tx=bar
looks like
foo = bar
to me when the compiler sees
foo = bar
If you want to go the layout way perhaps someone/you could put in a compiler
option for tab expansion. Check in
Peter wrote:
Currently, I expand tabs to 4 spaces only, so
\tx=bar
looks like
foo = bar
to me when the compiler sees
foo = bar
If you want to go the layout way perhaps someone/you could put in a compiler
option for tab expansion. Check in
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:49:27 +0100
Ingo Wechsung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I will write the braces and semicolons. It's better anyway in my
opinion.
I am not going to change my editing habits just to make hugs or ghc
happy.
What about using untabified files? Or an haskell-aware
Hello,
I'm new to Haskell and FP in general and I find it great.
Having more than 10 years expirience with whitespace does not matter
languages,
the only thing that drives me crazy is the layout rule.
As far as I understand it, I have 2 options:
1. Use braces and semicolons and ignore the
As far as I understand it, I have 2 options:
1. Use braces and semicolons and ignore the layout rules.
This is one option.
Just to be sure, can I really, really forget about layout if I write fully
braced and semicolonoized code?
Yes.
Besides, is there any reason why the syntax is LET {
Having more than 10 years expirience with whitespace does not
matter languages, the only thing that drives me crazy is the
layout rule.
so in 10 years of programming, you've never written a Makefile?-)
As far as I understand it, I have 2 options:
1. Use braces and semicolons and ignore
I think the compiler sees ^I and not spaces.
The layout rule follows similar guidelines to good
indenting practice expected in organizations that
program in other languages.
If you use (g)vim to edit, you can :set expandtab
to only use spaces for tabs. We do that where I
work after some
Thanks for the anserws.
So I will write the braces and semicolons. It's better anyway in my opinion.
I am not going to change my editing habits just to make hugs or ghc happy.
Wether spaces or tabs are better in source files is a matter of taste and
a language should not force me to use one or
At 2002-12-05 12:49, Ingo Wechsung wrote:
So I will write the braces and semicolons. It's better anyway in my opinion.
I am not going to change my editing habits just to make hugs or ghc happy.
Wether spaces or tabs are better in source files is a matter of taste and
a language should not force
G'day all.
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 09:49:27PM +0100, Ingo Wechsung wrote:
I am not going to change my editing habits just to make hugs or ghc happy.
What editor do you use? If you use a relatively smart one (e.g. vim,
emacs etc), you should be able to configure it to do it to do what you
want
I used to run into more problems with layout until i switched to a
simple set of layout rules which make it very easy to keep everything
laid out on tab boundrys.
rather than start layout blocks right after the 'let' 'do' or 'where',
put them on the next line with one more tabstop than the
At 2002-12-05 15:34, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
Wether spaces or tabs are better in source files is a matter of taste and
a language should not force me to use one or another.
The language does not force you to do anything of the sort. It's your
editor's fault if it can't decouple the concept of
G'day all.
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 06:36:22PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
Haven't we all been through this argument several months ago? I believe
the conclusion was people have different preferences, and Haskell allows
for that.
Sure, but that's a separate issue.
My remark was merely in
27 matches
Mail list logo
