I'm afraid I must agree with you a little. Many people use lists when a different data structure would have been better. It's a pity, because Haskell provides a large number of different data structures.
On 6/19/07, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jens Fisseler wrote: > The equivalent of Haskell's list data type would be the array type of most > imperative or object-oriented languages. Both are some sort of basic > collection type, good for their own sake, but if you want more > specialized collection types, you have to implement them. > Maybe it's just a culture thing then... In your typical OOP language, you spend five minutes thinking "now, what collection type shall I use here?" before going on to actually write the code. In Haskell, you just go "OK, so I'll put a list here..." _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
