On Jan 25, 2007, at 3:49 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
but as far as Haskell is concerned, I am perhaps less radical in my
approach than Mark is: Haskellers have invested an awful lot of
work in those conventional patterns, in readibility, in
optimisations, and in linking them with other extensions (eg., type
system extensions).
I actually would agree. The purist in me would want to use a
language with a simple exhaustive case construct
and pattern-binders and no more; but the pragmatist in me does,
usually, go with the flow of the language and use some of
the more complex pattern-matching constructs.
However, I did edit the web page to include an improved description
of First Class Patterns, for a point of
reference and comparison.
- Mark
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
