It's not only a matter of preference, but getting the result that you expect from the statement. Whether you look at visual expansion or the way the operation is defined most other places, I'm not sure how it could be considered working as described much less working as expected. Maybe it is working as intended, but that's not a criteria I'm basing my statements on.
On Thursday, December 15, 2016 at 3:04:31 PM UTC-6, Janis Voigtländer wrote: > > The two examples you provide, the first is left-to-right on *both* input >> and output. The other (Elm's) is not. Right fold is right-to-left on >> *both* input and output. The lack of symmetry between the two operations >> only reinforces the issue. >> > > I don't disagree with your preference for symmetry. I just pointed out > that if one considers processing order on the input (only), there is no > basis to say that Elm's foldl is wrong or not left-to-right. That one > should consider both input and output order/nesting when pondering the name > of this function seems not to have been a principle of the maker of that > decision. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
