[redirected to haskell-cafe]
Ashley Yakeley wrote (on 30-05-02 03:18 -0700):
At 2002-05-30 02:54, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
If you look at C ( offspring), it's not the {;} that makes the code
readable, it's the indentation that does. So why not acknowledge that?
In C, the indentation is
On Thursday 30 May 2002 13:43, Frank Atanassow wrote:
Anyway, I have the feeling that, for every person on this list who
complains about layout being unintuitive, there are 10 people who would say
the opposite. Shall we take a poll?
It's not unintuitive, it's counter-intuitive. :) The errors
Just to add my voice to the din...
I come from a c/c++/java background, and I taught myself haskell. The
layout rules were the part I had the least problem with. I'd prefer that
if any change is made it's one that adds options, not removes them. I'm
confused as to the source of the problem,
[redirected to haskell-cafe]
Jón Fairbairn wrote:
1. Why -f anyway? It took me ages to work out what
-fallow-overlapping-instances meant -- I wondered how
fallow could apply to overlapping instances.
I believe the authors of GHC followed the naming conventions
of GCC, which can be gleaned
At 2002-05-30 16:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Wmissing-protons
Compiles BASIC?
--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
: Re: Naming conventions for compiler options [Was: layout rule
infelicity]
At 2002-05-30 16:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Wmissing-protons
Compiles BASIC?
--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA
