Bas van Dijk writes (to the haskell-prime list):
The Clean Report[1] is not really clear on that but to my knowledge
nested
guards do not have fall-through semantics.
The report does mention this:
"To ensure that at least one of the alternatives of a nested guard
will be
successful, a nest
On 7/1/06, Bas van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would like to propose a feature from the FP language Clean[1] called Nested
Guards.
I do have to bring up that this is excluded from consideration for
Haskell' because it is not already implemented in any existing Haskell
compiler or interpre
On 7/1/06, Bas van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"To ensure that at least one of the alternatives of a nested guard will be
successful, a nested guarded alternative must always have a 'default case' as
last alternative."
Okay, that sounds like they don't have fall-through semantics in
Clean.
On Saturday 01 July 2006 18:44, Taral wrote:
> Does it have fall-through semantics?
The Clean Report[1] is not really clear on that but to my knowledge nested
guards do not have fall-through semantics.
The report does mention this:
"To ensure that at least one of the alternatives of a nested gu
On 7/1/06, Bas van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would like to propose a feature from the FP language Clean[1] called Nested
Guards. Example from [2]:
example arg1 arg2
| predicate11 arg1
| predicate21 arg2 = calculate1 arg1 arg2
| predicate22 arg2 = c
