Matthias Fischmann wrote: > although this wasn't the original problem, i like it, too :). but now > i am stuck in finding an optimal implementation for lines.
Isn't the obvious one good enough?
lines [] = []
lines s = go s
where
go [] = [[]]
go ('\n':s) = [] : lines s
go (c:s) = let (l:ls) = go s in (c:l):ls
Udo.
--
"Money can't buy friends, but it can get you a better class of enemy."
-- Spike Milligan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
