Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| I like the strong static type system of Haskell for various
| reasons. One reason is, that it makes easier to understand new
| code. I.e. when I read code I type ':t foo' in ghci/hugs from
| time to time, to check my own idea of the type signature, if it
| is not
Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
concerning the problem of getting at the types of local definitions:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
The principal difficulties here are to do with what do we want
rather the implementation challenges.
1. Should the compiler print the type of every
On 2 May 2007 16:16:57 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* It would be nice if this worked inside the do-notation, too:
do x :: Ordering
x - m
(This is curently a syntax error.)
I think the following works with -fglasgow-exts:
do (x :: Ordering) - m
--
-David
* It would be nice if this worked inside the do-notation, too:
do x :: Ordering
x - m
(This is curently a syntax error.)
I think the following works with -fglasgow-exts:
do (x :: Ordering) - m
I know, but it is not as nice!
;-)
Wolfram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
concerning the problem of getting at the types of local definitions:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
The principal difficulties here are to do with what do we want
rather the implementation challenges.
1. Should the compiler
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 04:16:57PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now the compiler gives you wonderful error messages
``cannot match type `x y z' against Ordering'' ---
so you replace ``Ordering'' with ``x y z''.
You could just use a rigid type variable:
foo :: a
foo = ...
(What is the
| I like the strong static type system of Haskell for various
| reasons. One reason is, that it makes easier to understand new
| code. I.e. when I read code I type ':t foo' in ghci/hugs from
| time to time, to check my own idea of the type signature, if it
| is not included in the source code.
On 28/04/07, Georg Sauthoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I mention this, because I would like to integrate some
lookup feature (for type signatures) into vim (if it doesn't
exist yet).
It's worth pointing out that Emacs's haskell-mode already has this.
For anyone that uses the major mode but
On 29/04/07, David House [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's worth pointing out that Emacs's haskell-mode already has this.
For anyone that uses the major mode but hasn't heard of the
inf-haskell features:
I did forget to mention that this won't help with your 'offside'
functions, though.
--
-David
