Martin,
importFile :: Editor - String - IO ()
importFile ed path = do
s - readFile path
ps - mapM (\x - makePair (x, )) (lines s)
es - return $ V.fromList ps
writeIORef ed es
loadFile :: Editor - String - IO ()
loadFile ed path = do
s - readFile path
ps - mapM makePair
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Stefan Holdermans
ste...@vectorfabrics.com wrote:
Have you considered abstracting over the bits in which importFile and
loadFile differ? For example:
processFile :: (String - IO [PairBox]) - Editor - String - IO ()
processFile f ed path = do
s -
Martin,
(The trick with `flip` is tempting, but again at the
cost of having to peer rather too closely at the implementation of
processFile when reading the code).
That trick is of course completely orthogonal. One could just as well write:
processFile :: (String - [a]) - (a - (String,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Stefan Holdermans
ste...@vectorfabrics.com wrote:
Martin,
(The trick with `flip` is tempting, but again at the
cost of having to peer rather too closely at the implementation of
processFile when reading the code).
That trick is of course completely
Am 29.11.2011 um 09:16 schrieb Martin DeMello:
I have the following functions:
makePair :: (String, String) - IO PairBox
parseFile :: String - [(String, String)]
importFile :: Editor - String - IO ()
importFile ed path = do
s - readFile path
ps - mapM (\x - makePair (x, )) (lines
Martin,
Quick question: what's the difference between
importFile ed = readfile = fromRawFile = setEditor ed
and
importFile = readfile = fromRawFile = setEditor
that the former compiles but the latter doesn't?
Note that, in Haskell, function application has higher priority then any
2011/11/29 Stefan Holdermans ste...@vectorfabrics.com:
Martin,
(The trick with `flip` is tempting, but again at the
cost of having to peer rather too closely at the implementation of
processFile when reading the code).
That trick is of course completely orthogonal. One could just as well
