On Tuesday 23 September 2008 02:27:17 Brian Hurt wrote: > On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, wren ng thornton wrote: > > Even with functionalists ---of the OCaml and SML ilk--- > > this use of spaces can be confusing if noone explains that function > > application binds tighter than all operators. > > Bwuh? Ocaml programmers certainly know that application binds tighter > than operators. And as: > > let f x y = ... in > f a b > > is more efficient (in Ocaml) than: > > let f (x, y) = ... in > f (a, b) > > (Ocaml doesn't optimize away the tuple allocation)...
That is incorrect. OCaml does optimize away that tuple: both forms compile to the same 2-argument function. OCaml does not optimize away this tuple: let a, b = 1, 2 So, when efficiency is important, you write: let a = 1 and b = 2 -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe