On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 14:24:48 UTC, renoX wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 14:15:12 UTC, Max Samukha
wrote:
[cut]
I think that -> is neither unnecessary nor noise. After having
played with Haskell for a while, I actually find the syntax of
D unnecessarily redundant.
Oh, D is hardly a good example for syntax! Better than C++
doesn't say much..
Ok.
That said, I don't see how one could prefer 'a -> b -> c' over
'a,b -> c' in this case..
In case of Haskell, it is not a matter of preference. The syntax
follows from the language semantics and I don't see how it can be
different and better at the same time. (a, b) -> c means a
function that maps a pair to an object (the same as ((,) a b) ->
c). a -> b -> c, parens around b -> c omitted thanks to right
associativity, means a function that maps an object to a
function. How does a, b -> c fits in this picture?
This is not the only 'visual noise' in Haskell: for example
Idris replaced '::' by ':', a good change IMHO.
That is probably because ':' is the list append operator
already.
Yes, it's the other way round in Idris, but for once I prefer
D's operator '~': list appending is common enough that it
deserves a proper operator not a doubled one :: like in Idris
or other (Scala?).
Sadly, I don't know Idris or Scala.
Now we are talking about subjective preferences, which is an
exercise in futility. :)
renoX
