Hi Richard,
Yeek. Why do you want to do _that_?
Heh. I've got a parser and I want to check what I've parsed (it's an
exercise in Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 Hours).
check (Atom _) (Atom _) = True
check (Bool _) (Bool _) = True
check __= False
Yes I
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Dan danielkc...@gmail.com wrote:
You hit the nail on the head. Why I am doing this is because of
boilerplate. Boilerplate gives me rashes and bulbous spots on the nose.
Consider the following Ruby code:
def check(zeClass, zeValue)
Ryan Ingram wrote:
Dan danielkc...@gmail.com wrote:
I figured there would be a clever Haskell idiom that would give me a
similarly concise route. Does it really require Template Haskell? I can
barely parse regular Haskell as it is..
[...]
Alternatively, you can define a fold[1] once:
Hi,
(Relatively new to Haskell here ..)
So I have the following:
data MyVal = Atom String
| Bool Bool
And I want to do something like this
check :: (Bool - MyVal) - MyVal - True
check f (f x) = True
check _ _ = False
What that means is I want to pass a MyVal
Hi Dan,
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Dan Cook danielkc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
(Relatively new to Haskell here ..)
So I have the following:
data MyVal = Atom String
| Bool Bool
And I want to do something like this
check :: (Bool - MyVal) - MyVal - True
On 2 Jun 2009, at 3:39 pm, Dan Cook wrote:
Hi,
(Relatively new to Haskell here ..)
So I have the following:
data MyVal = Atom String
| Bool Bool
And I want to do something like this
check :: (Bool - MyVal) - MyVal - True
check f (f x) = True
check _ _ = False
What
