[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that computable real fixity levels are useful, too.
Only finitely many operators can be declared in a given Haskell program.
Thus the strongest property you need in your set of precedence levels is
that given arbitrary finite sets of precedences A and B, with
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned showsPrec and readsPrec. Anything
more complicated than negative fixities would require their interfaces to be
changed.
-- Ben
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mai
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
> I'm surprised that no one has mentioned showsPrec and readsPrec. Anything more
> complicated than negative fixities would require their interfaces to be
> changed.
Very true. Does it mean, that the Functional Graph Library has to become
part of the
I think it's time that string literals got overloaded just like
numeric literals. There are several reasons for this. One reason is
the new fast string libraries. They are great, but string literals
don't work; you need to pack them first. Another reason is the
increasing use of Haskell
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 10:49:15PM -0500, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> Any thoughts?
what about pattern matching?
> class IsString s where
> fromString :: String -> s
> class IsString s => EqString s where
> eqString :: String -> s -> Bool
another posibillity would be for pattern
john:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 10:49:15PM -0500, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> > Any thoughts?
>
> what about pattern matching?
Yes, pattern matching is the issue that occurs to me too.
While string literals :: ByteString would be nice (and other magic
encoded in string literals, I guess), what i
Pattern matching would work like pattern matching with numeric
literals does.
You'll have to use equality comparison. To pattern match the string
type
would have to be in Eq as well.
-- Lennart
On Nov 10, 2006, at 23:33 , Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
john:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at
