Re: [Haskell-beginners] Boilerplate Code

On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 04:19:58PM +0300, Alex Rozenshteyn wrote:

I have never used Data.Typeable, but maybe it could be made relevant here?

Not really. Data.Typeable lets you pass (representations of) types around at runtime, and thus do things like type-safe casts. So it's useful for things like serialization, extracting things out of existential wrappers, and so on. It isn't really relevant in this situation, as Matt already has all the type information he could want. -Brent

On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Brent Yorgey wrote:

...

...

Hi all,

I am in the process of writing a Scheme interpreter/compiler in Haskell as my first serious project after learning the basics of Haskell. The goal is to really get a feel for Haskell. I am trying to accomplish this as much as I can on my own, but am referring to Jonathan Tang's 'Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 hours' whenever I get really stuck.

I have a question regarding a pattern that I have found within my code for which I cannot seem to find an abstraction.

I am implementing some of the primitive Scheme type-checker functions with the following code:

numberP :: SchemeVal -> SchemeVal numberP (Number _) = Bool True numberP _ = Bool False

boolP :: SchemeVal -> SchemeVal boolP (Bool _) = Bool True boolP _ = Bool False

symbolP :: SchemeVal -> SchemeVal symbolP (Atom _) = Bool True symbolP _ = Bool False

This is a pattern that I could easily provide an abstraction for with a Lisp macro, but I'm having trouble discovering if/how it's possible to do so elegantly in Haskell. The closest (but obviously incorrect) code to what I'm

On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 09:51:45PM +1000, Matt Andrew wrote: trying to accomplish would be:

It isn't really possible to abstract this any further in Haskell. Constructors are rather magical functions, but they are still functions, and like other functions cannot be compared for equality directly. Pattern-matching them is the only sort of equality comparison you get.

With that said, your intuition to use Lisp macros is a good one. Haskell has a similar metaprogramming facility called Template Haskell, which could easily be used to automatically generate these sorts of functions. Of course, it's a little more complicated than Lisp macros since Haskell syntax is so much more complex than Lisp's -- but given that, on the whole it's not so bad. I wouldn't use TH to generate just the three functions you showed -- but I would certainly consider it for ten.

-Brent _______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners

-- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments

Alex R

_______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners