Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Of course unary minus should bind tighter than any infix operator.
I remember suggesting this when the language was designed, but the
Haskell committee was very set against it (mostly Joe Fasel I think).
Are there archives of this discussion anywhere?
Cheers,
Sittampalam, Ganesh
ganesh.sittampa...@credit-suisse.com
writes:
Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Of course unary minus should bind tighter than any infix operator.
I remember suggesting this when the language was designed, but the
Haskell committee was very set against it (mostly Joe Fasel I
It's not true at all that Haskell was created by type theorists.
It is true that little attention was paid for how things are done in C. :)
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:39 PM, johndea...@cox.net wrote:
It needs to be appreciated that the Haskell language was created by type
theorists who were
| I imagine it would be something like deleting the production
|
| lexp6- - exp7
The rational for the current choice was the example:
f x = -x^2
| and adding the production
|
| exp10- - fexp
But I would also recommend this change.
It would also make sense to
My impression is that combinatory logic figures prominently in the design of
Haskell and some of the constructs seem to be best understood as combinatorial
logic with syntactic sugar. One could predict from this a number of things. One
of such is the language would at some points seem counter
One we start discussing syntax again it might be a good occasion to
reformulate/make more precise a few points.
The following program is accepted by the Utrecht Haskell Compiler
(here we took great effort to follow the report closely ;-} instead of
spending our time on n+k patterns), but
Do you deal with this correctly as well:
case () of _ - 1==1==True
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:43 PM, S. Doaitse Swierstra doai...@cs.uu.nl wrote:
One we start discussing syntax again it might be a good occasion to
reformulate/make more precise a few points.
The following program is accepted
On 10 Feb, 2010, at 00:53 , Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Do you deal with this correctly as well:
case () of _ - 1==1==True
No, that is, in the same way as GHC Hugs, by reporting an error. The
report acknowledges that compilers may not deal with this correctly
when it has the form ``let
