[Haskell-cafe] Proposal: New syntax for Haskell

[Ian Ross]

Me too, but I wasn't brave enough to say so after people seemed to be
taking it seriously...


On 10 September 2013 13:33, Roman Cheplyaka <roma at ro-che.info> wrote:

> * John Wiegley <johnw at fpcomplete.com> [2013-09-10 04:48:36-0500]
> > >>>>> Niklas Hambüchen <mail at nh2.me> writes:
> >
> > > Code written in cucumber syntax is concise and easy to read
> >
> >     concise |kənˈsīs|, adj.
> >
> >     giving a lot of information clearly and in a few words; brief but
> >     comprehensive.
> >
> > Compare:
> >
> >     Scenario: Defining the function foldl
> >       Given I want do define foldl
> >       Which has the type (in brackets) a to b to a (end of brackets),
> >                          to a, to list of b, to a
> >       And my arguments are called f, acc, and l
> >       When l is empty
> >       Then the result better be acc
> >       Otherwise l is x cons xs
> >       Then the result should be foldl f (in brackets) f acc x
> >                                 (end of brackets) xs
> >
> > To:
> >
> >     foldl :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> [b] -> a
> >     foldl f z []     = z
> >     foldl f z (x:xs) = foldl f (f z x) xs
> >
> > How is that more concise or preferable?
>
> I thought it was a joke.
>
> Roman
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>


-- 
Ian Ross   Tel: +43(0)6804451378   ian at skybluetrades.net
www.skybluetrades.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20130910/499e4ef6/attachment.htm>