Am Montag, 6. März 2006 16:52 schrieb Malcolm Wallace:
Daniel Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the beginning of the module, there is _no_ current indentation
level - thus the fourth equation of L applies.
I think, the third from last equation of L applies, since
If the first lexeme
Brian Hulley wrote:
However I think there is an error in the description of this in
section 2.7 of the Haskell98 report, which states:
If the indentation of the non-brace lexeme immediately following a
where, let, do or of is less than or equal to the current indentation
level, then
Daniel Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the beginning of the module, there is _no_ current indentation
level - thus the fourth equation of L applies.
I think, the third from last equation of L applies, since
If the first lexeme of a module is _not_ { or module, then it is
preceded by
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
However I think there is an error in the description of this in
section 2.7 of the Haskell98 report, which states:
If the indentation of the non-brace lexeme immediately following a
where, let, do or of is less than or equal to the current
Am Freitag, 3. März 2006 19:21 schrieb Brian Hulley:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
One other thing I've been wanting to ask (not to change! :-)) for a
while is: how is the following acceptable according to the rules in
the Haskell98 report where where is one of the lexemes,
Daniel Fischer wrote:
Am Freitag, 3. März 2006 19:21 schrieb Brian Hulley:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
[snip]
AFAICT, the description in the report is correct, *except for the
'where' in module LayOut where*.
[snip]
So my guess is that layout-processing is applied only to the
Brian Hulley wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
One other thing I've been wanting to ask (not to change! :-)) for a
while is: how is the following acceptable according to the rules in
the Haskell98 report where where is one of the lexemes, which when
followed by a line more indented than the line the
On 28/02/06, Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why? Surely typing one tab is better than having to hit the spacebar 4 (or
8) times?
I'm really puzled here. I've been using tabs to indent my C++ code for at
least 10 years and don't see the problem. The only problem would be if
someone
Brian Hulley wrote:
[snip]
So any solutions welcome :-)
Thank to everyone who replied to my queries about this whole layout issue.
One other thing I've been wanting to ask (not to change! :-)) for a while
is: how is the following acceptable according to the rules in the Haskell98
report
Layout only applies when something is less indented than previous
lines, I believe...
e.g.
do
c - getContents filename
putStrLn blah
or
do
x - getContents filename
putStrLn ok
works fine but
do
c - blahAction
putStrLn blah
obviously won't work
Jared.
On 3/2/06,
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 02:36, Brian Hulley wrote:
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Here is my proposed layout rule:
1) All layout keywords (where, of, let, do) must either be
followed by a single element of the corresponding block type, and
explicit block introduced by
Benjamin Franksen wrote:
[snip]
I am used to hitting TAB key and get the correct number of spaces,
according to how I configured my editor (NEdit) for the current
language mode.
The only thing then is what happens when you type backspace or left arrow to
get back out to a previous
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 13:35, Brian Hulley wrote:
Benjamin Franksen wrote:
[snip]
I am used to hitting TAB key and get the correct number of spaces,
according to how I configured my editor (NEdit) for the current
language mode.
The only thing then is what happens when you type
Am Mittwoch, 1. März 2006 11:57 schrieb Benjamin Franksen:
TAB characters in program text should be forbidden by law. As well as
editors that by default insert a tab char instead of spaces.
As founding member of the church of The only good Tabbing involves Michaela,
I wholeheartedly agree.
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 12:35:44 -, Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The only thing then is what happens when you type backspace or left
arrow to get back out to a previous indentation?
The Borland IDEs have long supported various smart indentation
features, which can each be individually
Brian Hulley wrote:
Here is my proposed layout rule:
1) All layout keywords (where, of, let, do) must either be followed by a
single element of the corresponding block type, and explicit block
introduced by '{', or a layout block whose first line starts on the
*next* line
I wouldn't have
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Here is my proposed layout rule:
1) All layout keywords (where, of, let, do) must either be followed
by a single element of the corresponding block type, and explicit
block introduced by '{', or a layout block whose first line starts
on the *next*
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Brian Hulley wrote:
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Here is my proposed layout rule:
snip
and whose indentation is accomplished *only* by tabs
You can't be serious. This would cause far more problems than the
current rule.
Why? Surely typing
BH Why? Surely typing one tab is better than having to hit the
spacebar 4 (or 8)
BH times?
PC Not when it prevents me from ever exhibiting the slightest shred of style
PC in my code. I use that control for readability purposes in my code.
[snip]
BH I'm really puzled here. I've been using tabs
Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You can't be serious. This would cause far more problems than the
current rule.
Why? Surely typing one tab is better than having to hit the spacebar 4
(or 8) times?
What you type depends on your editor. I hit tab, and the editor
inserts an appropriate
20 matches
Mail list logo
