I've been using Rust which has terminal commas in the syntactic
enumerations and it's, frankly, lovely. Less editing and easier
copy/paste or use of macros when I am munging code. If it seems sloppy
to you, it's probably because you aren't accustomed to it.
We have to remember that we work with code and not sentential English.
In my view, mechanical ease should take priority over apparent
naturalness. There have been many people who've objected that Haskell
function application syntax is unnatural because they are accustomed
to C-style f(arg, arg1) syntax.
Cf. https://medium.com/@nikgraf/why-you-should-enforce-dangling-commas-for-multi...
I'd like to see this get in unless there are real technical issues
blocking it. I don't think it's our place to block an optional
extension on aesthetic grounds unless it was beyond the pale of what
the language is or does. I don't see how an extension permitting extra
commas would qualify.
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 10:37 AM, Joachim Breitner
Hi,
Am Samstag, den 02.06.2018, 13:04 -0700 schrieb Iavor Diatchki:
Well, I think it is a bad idea. Obviously I don't think it has a huge impact on the language, but I think it encourages poor style, for very questionable befits. This is quite subjective, of course, but I think that this choice is at odds with Haskell's elegant surface syntax. We don't allow repeated punctuation in written prose,,,, why would we want in our programs?,,,
looks like there is some discussion needed here…
Cheers, Joachim
-- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com