Re: A new view of guards

[Tony Davie]

>I'm quite comfortable with the idea. Guards are part of the lhs of an
>equation, and that is where binding takes place.
>
>The <- syntax worries me a bit, because in the comprehension use it has a
>different type, but the let syntax is available, and one can write
>"let p = e"  "for p <- e". I think that, to reduce possible confusion, I would
>use, and teach, the let form. Given that, I don't object to the funny use of
><-.
>
>--brian

Yes. I really like the fact that at last guards in comprehensions and those
in function defns have the same syntax. But shouldn't they have the same
semantics too? I would rather expect

f g l| x <- l = g x

or something like it, to be the map function.

So I, like Brian, would prefer 'let ... = ...' to '... <- ...'




                                                     _____
                                                    /    /\
Tony Davie                Computer Science         /    /  \
Tel: +44 1334 463257      St.Andrews University   /    /    \
Fax: +44 1334 463278      North Haugh            /    /  /\  \
[EMAIL PROTECTED]       St.Andrews            /    /  /  \  \
                          Scotland             /    /  /\   \  \
                          KY16 9SS            /    /  /  \   \  \
                                             /    /__/____\   \  \
                                            /              \   \  \
http://www.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~ad/Home.html  /________________\   \  \
                                           \                     \  \
                                            \_____________________\ /

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but
in practice there is a great deal of difference.