On 05/06/2016 06:34 PM, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
[--snip--]
> By the way, leading/trailing separators conflict with the syntax for tuple
> sections:
>
> (True,) :: t -> (Bool, t)
> (,True) :: t -> (t, Bool)
>
> I think that it wold be quite odd if leading/trailing commas meant one
> thing in tuples
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/05/16 21:58, Cale Gibbard wrote:
> I can't really be the only one here who thinks that this kind of
> discussion of extensions to the syntax of Haskell is totally
> inappropriate when we have a large number of already implemented
>
I can't really be the only one here who thinks that this kind of
discussion of extensions to the syntax of Haskell is totally
inappropriate when we have a large number of already implemented
extensions to the language whose interactions with each other are
largely undocumented. The Haskell Report
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/05/16 19:22, David Luposchainsky wrote:
> Just for confirmation, you meant
>
>> > [ Foo
>> > , Bar
>> > , Fu
>> > , Baz ]
> and not
>
>> > [ Foo
>> > , Bar
>> > , Fu
>> > , Baz
>> > ]
> in your email, right?
Yes. The latter is how I have
I frequently run into the (relatively minor) list comma problem when writing
testsuites. I'd welcome a grammar change that simply skips all commas before "]"
and after "[" or similar.
I think this issue is related to TupleSections in that Haskell does not provide
good syntax for these common
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/05/16 18:34, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
> I am not convinced by the argument that this will help make 'diffs'
> considerably simpler: we have tools for visualizing diffs,
Most people I know read plaintext patches in emails. Others use things
like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Haskell uses separators for values in a number of syntactic
constructs. It is my understanding of the 2010 report that the
language does however not generally support leading separators, nor
trailing separators, nor both (two exceptions are
