[Haskell-cafe] Proposal: Non-recursive let

[Andreas Abel]

I can do this without extra indentation:

   (|>) = flip ($)

   f = 5 |> \ x ->
       6 |> \ y ->
       x + y

Non-recursive let is as superfluous as the do-notation.

On 11.07.2013 17:40, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> Yup. Nested cases *are* non recursive lets.
>
> (Can't believe I forgot about that )
>
> On Thursday, July 11, 2013, Edward Kmett wrote:
>
>     On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:47 AM, <oleg at okmij.org <javascript:_e({},
>     'cvml', 'oleg at okmij.org');>> wrote:
>
>
>         Jon Fairbairn wrote:
>          > It just changes forgetting to use different variable names
>         because of
>          > recursion (which is currently uniform throughout the language) to
>          > forgetting to use non recursive let instead of let.
>
>         Let me bring to the record the message I just wrote on Haskell-cafe
>         http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2013-July/109116.html
>
>         and repeat the example:
>
>         In OCaml, I can (and often do) write
>
>                  let (x,s) = foo 1 [] in
>                  let (y,s) = bar x s in
>                  let (z,s) = baz x y s in ...
>
>         In Haskell I'll have to uniquely number the s's:
>
>                  let (x,s1)  = foo 1 [] in
>                  let (y,s2)  = bar x s1 in
>                  let (z,s3)  = baz x y s2 in ...
>
>         and re-number them if I insert a new statement.
>
>
>     blah = case foo 1 [] of
>        (x, s) -> case bar x s of
>           (y, s) -> case baz x y s of
>             (z, s) -> ...
>
>     -Edward
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>


-- 
Andreas Abel  <><      Du bist der geliebte Mensch.

Theoretical Computer Science, University of Munich
Oettingenstr. 67, D-80538 Munich, GERMANY

andreas.abel at ifi.lmu.de
http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~abel/