[Haskell-cafe] Refactoring status

[C.M.Brown]

> Furthermore, IMHO, type signatures alone are not enough, a good parameter
> name says at least as much as the type.

Yes! A very good point! :)

>
> E.g. what does a function Int -> Int -> Bool do? I have no idea. A good
> function name helps, e.g. isDivisible:: Int -> Int -> Bool. But then I still
> don't know which parameter is the numerator and denominator. So good names
> for the parameters are at least as important, e.g. isDivisible ::
> numerator:Int -> denonimator:Int -> Bool
>

I agree. But I was generally thinking of more complex functions than this,
especially if they use some kind of user-defined monad and have implicit
parameters, say.

Cheers,
Chris.