I like the capability to redefine syntax.
For example, I would like to be able to define syntax that looks like
EBNF when writing parsers. I would like to be able to write
E = T {(`+`|`-`) T}
rather than
e = concat1 (t,zeroOrMore (concat2 (alternative (lit '+',lit '-'),t)))
Of course infix
Subject: Re: Arrays and general functions
Reginald Meeson writes
Interesting discussion, but it seems to me that Haskell already
provides the best of both worlds, namely
a. Efficient implementation of arrays as data objects, with indexing
as a projection function; and
David Barton writes:
And finally, it makes sense to have separate syntax for arrays and
general functions, because different behavior is expected for the two.
Here, I may be exposing my cluelessness, but this seems a (search for
a better word --- none found) silly statement. There are
for the two.
Ken Sailor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
for the two.
Ken Sailor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
