On Jan 22, 2007, at 6:57 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> I'm thinking of implementing it in GHC, so I'd be interested in
feedback of the form
> - how desirable is it to have a feature of this general form?
While it looks like a useful extension with a lot of bang for the buck,
I think I'd prefer to live without it; two reasons:
1) I'm a minimalist
2) I find that using my pattern combinators
(http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/tullsen00first.html)
and do-notation I get by very well without using any of the advanced
features of patterns. OK, I guess I'm a little biased.
> - can this particular proposal be improved?
I definitely agree with Claus's comment:
> 5 possible extension 1 smells of superfluous complexity. There is
almost no gain
> compared to using tuples, but there's a lot to pay in added
types and rules.m
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
