Mike Gunter wrote:
I had hoped the History of Haskell paper would answer a question
I've pondered for some time: why does Haskell have the if-then-else
syntax? The paper doesn't address this. What's the story?
For what it's worth, I have been asking myself the same question several
times.
G'day all.
Quoting Benjamin Franksen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
For what it's worth, I have been asking myself the same question several
times. If/then/else syntax could be replaced by a regular (lazy) function
without any noticeable loss.
I believe that if-then-else cannot be replaced by a regular
Confusingly,
if c
then t
else f
Also works, although no-one really knows why.
Actually, it doesn't work inside a `do' layout,
Stefan
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 7/26/06, Donn Cave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That looks to me like a different way to spell if then else, but maybe
that's the answer to the question - conceptually, for every then there
really is an else, however you spell it, and only in a procedural language
does it make any sense to leave
On 7/27/06, Dan Doel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/26/06, Donn Cave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That looks to me like a different way to spell if then else, but maybe
that's the answer to the question - conceptually, for every then there
really is an else, however you spell it, and only in a
