[Haskell-cafe] Re: Unexported functions are evil

2005-05-17 Thread Peter Simons
Thanks for your opinions everybody! Ketil Malde writes: I guess you could sometimes have name clashes as well? I was afraid about those for the longest time too, but in practice name clashes curiously enough hardly ever occur -- in my experience. The problem only arises when you actually

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Unexported functions are evil

2005-05-17 Thread Iavor Diatchki
Hello, On 17 May 2005 12:09:35 +0200, Peter Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Iavor Diatchki writes: [...] in practice this is likely to often lead to recursive modules [...] Why is that? My intuition would say that the exact opposite is true: a more fine-grained set of modules is

[Haskell-cafe] Re: Unexported functions are evil

2005-05-17 Thread Peter Simons
Iavor Diatchki writes: Do you have an concrete example which illustrates this point? [...] consider a file A.hs that defines some data type T and exports a function f that is defined in terms of a private function g. Now if we place g in a file called Private.hs then A needs to