[Haskell-cafe] Seeking for an extention (functional incapsulation)
lambda-belka at yandex.ru
Thu Aug 6 20:39:40 EDT 2009
Thank you, for your reply, Dan! :)
> You don't really need this inline in the record syntax, do you?
In fact, that was the point. To enclose direct functional dependants into
the record declaration. To achieve better pithiness - it's valuable, and the
value grows exponentially with LOC (lines of code) count. :)
> sdtField3 sdt = f <$> sdtField1 <*> sdtField2
Doesn't look much better than my "under" function (t `under` f = \x y -> (x
f) `t` (y f)). What did I miss?
I believe, there are good reasons to use Control.Applicative for lots
purposes, but unfortunately, yet haven't had time to try it in my practice.
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Seeking-for-an-extention-%28functional-incapsulation%29-tp24856249p24856983.html
Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe