Hello Thomas, Saturday, March 28, 2009, 1:04:01 PM, you wrote:
> To get back on topic though... Here's *why* I don't want these > specific things I wouldn't use added to haskell: > • The syntax gains very little over the nice consistent syntax we > already have – all you do is move a symbol a little to the left. main problem with lack-of-syntax is that we write "variables" at right: action x y >>= \v -> do action x y $ \v -> do another problem is all those funny "$\->do" one need to write > • We encourage people to write code unnecessarily in an imperative > style i wonder at this argument. we make using 'do' simpler and this is bad thing? :) probably you should argue against invention monads at all - it's Wadler who added imperative features to this pure shine Haskell :D about syntax - i don't mean that i proposed something ideal i just want to figure out here one pattern of 'do' usage which i use quite often. imho, moving variables to the left would be good thing, exact syntax is a matter of debates -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
