On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 01:13:20 +0300, Lauri Alanko l...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 02:45:58PM -0700, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:03:48 +0100, Peter Wortmann sc...@leeds.ac.uk
wrote:
Might be off-topic here, but I have wondered for a while why Haskell
doesn't
Hi,
On 06.10.2010, at 22:43, Sterling Clover wrote:
On Oct 6, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
A slightly different suggestion from Simon PJ and myself (we agreed on
something syntax-related :-) is the following:
\case 1 - f
2 - g
where the two-token sequence '\ case'
Отправлено с iPhone
Oct 7, 2010, в 21:03, Peter Wortmann sc...@leeds.ac.uk написал(а):
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 17:10 -0700, Evan Laforge wrote:
+1 for something to solve the dummy - m; case dummy of problem.
Here are the possibilities I can think of:
Might be off-topic here, but I have
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:03:48 +0100, Peter Wortmann sc...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 17:10 -0700, Evan Laforge wrote:
+1 for something to solve the dummy - m; case dummy of problem.
Here are the possibilities I can think of:
Might be off-topic here, but I have wondered for a
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 02:45:58PM -0700, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:03:48 +0100, Peter Wortmann sc...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
Might be off-topic here, but I have wondered for a while why Haskell
doesn't support something like follows:
do case (- m) of ...
With the
On 6 October 2010 11:39, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
Certainly some existing code would fail to parse, e.g.
(case e of [] - \x - x+1; (x:xs) - \x - x+2)
That's definitely a problem. The multi-pattern lambda is nice as I
think it follows naturally from function definitions
On 10/06/10 13:32, steffen wrote:
A slightly different suggestion from Simon PJ and myself (we agreed on
something syntax-related :-) is the following:
\case 1 - f
2 - g
...
\case { 1 - f; 2 - g }
+1
I like this because it has exactly the same properties of Max's
case-of, but
On Oct 6, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
A slightly different suggestion from Simon PJ and myself (we agreed on
something syntax-related :-) is the following:
\case 1 - f
2 - g
where the two-token sequence '\ case' introduces a new optional layout
context, the body of
At 4:43 PM -0400 10/6/10, Sterling Clover wrote:
On Oct 6, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
A slightly different suggestion from Simon PJ and myself (we
agreed on something syntax-related :-) is the following:
\case 1 - f
2 - g
where the two-token sequence '\ case'
I would also very much like to have multi-argument pattern matching, but in
\case a b - ...
...
it sure suggests to me that `a` should be applied to `b` before casing.
I feel like sugar is designed to make a couple of specific uses nicer.
Being as general and orthogonal as
10 matches
Mail list logo
