Yup. Nested cases *are* non recursive lets.
(Can't believe I forgot about that )
On Thursday, July 11, 2013, Edward Kmett wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:47 AM, <o...@okmij.org <javascript:_e({},
> 'cvml', 'o...@okmij.org');>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Jon Fairbairn wrote:
>> > It just changes forgetting to use different variable names because of
>> > recursion (which is currently uniform throughout the language) to
>> > forgetting to use non recursive let instead of let.
>>
>> Let me bring to the record the message I just wrote on Haskell-cafe
>>
>> http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2013-July/109116.html
>>
>> and repeat the example:
>>
>> In OCaml, I can (and often do) write
>>
>> let (x,s) = foo 1 [] in
>> let (y,s) = bar x s in
>> let (z,s) = baz x y s in ...
>>
>> In Haskell I'll have to uniquely number the s's:
>>
>> let (x,s1) = foo 1 [] in
>> let (y,s2) = bar x s1 in
>> let (z,s3) = baz x y s2 in ...
>>
>
>
>> and re-number them if I insert a new statement.
>>
>
> blah = case foo 1 [] of
> (x, s) -> case bar x s of
> (y, s) -> case baz x y s of
> (z, s) -> ...
>
> -Edward
>
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
