On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:13:19 -0700 Dave Bayer <ba...@cpw.math.columbia.edu> wrote:
> Part of the dominance of scripting languages is clean support for > heredocs. So much of every arena of life comes down to getting "It's > not about me!" I love Haskell but it doesn't get this. Imagine a > document that's nominally Haskell, but about 80% some other language > such as TeX (e.g. code for a self-generating textbook). Anything > short of "these lines belong to the other language, with not a single > intervening character in the way" simply doesn't work. So, yes, > Haskell supports multi-line strings, but not heredocs, a subtle but > crucial syntactic distinction. Restated, one can cut and paste many > entire lines of foreign code into a heredoc, with no worries about > conversion. > > Heredocs should be part of the base spec of any credible language, > with the requirement "Can the language completely disappear behind > another language, in the source file?" As I said, the key issue is > getting "It's not about me!" > > On Jun 28, 2011, at 1:57 AM, Jean-Marie Gaillourdet wrote: > > > Hi Audrey, > > > > are you aware that Haskell already supports multi-line strings? > > > > foo = "This is a\ > > \multi-line\ > > \string!" > > > > See Section 2.6 of http://haskell.org/onlinereport/lexemes.html > > > > Regards, > > Jean I fully agree. Heredocs should work like described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_document I am a Haskell newbie, and thus don't know if a real heredoc facility already exists. If not then it seems that string-qq does nicely jump in. In this case: Thanks for providing this package. -- Manfred _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
