[Haskell] Long live Edison
zednenem at psualum.com
Tue Feb 21 01:19:31 EST 2006
ajb at spamcop.net writes:
> G'day all.
> Quoting Robert Dockins <robdockins at fastmail.fm>:
> > -- The Sequence 'rcons' method takes its arguments in the opposite
> > order as the 'lcons' method (for mnemonic purposes). Should the
> > arguments to 'rcons' be reversed?
> The argument is that they both take their arguments in the order
> that they would do were they implemented with concatenation:
> lcons x xs === [x] ++ xs
> rcons xs x === xs ++ [x]
> This certainly makes sense to me. Is there an argument for using
> the other order?
The order of rcons is also natural for using in-line, e.g. "xs `rcons`
David Menendez <zednenem at psualum.com> | "In this house, we obey the laws
<http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem> | of thermodynamics!"
More information about the Haskell