[Haskell-cafe] Re: If wishes were horses... (was: Re: definition of
waldmann at imn.htwk-leipzig.de
Fri Mar 12 06:01:33 EST 2010
David Virebayre <dav.vire+haskell <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Even if we had a syntax to express that the function is strict,
> wouldn't we still need two distinct function names for the strict and
> lazy case ?
OK, I'd like to register a "code smell" for:
"hierarchical/systematic structure inside identifier names";
suggested refactoring: use hierarchy/structure provided by the language,
in this case, something like: Data.List.Strict.fold, Data.List.Lazy.fold
Or - if we had static overloading, and strictness info in the type,
then we wouldn't need different names. Can of worms ...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe