Re: lambda case

Oh, PLEASE people. Let's not have another round of bikeshedding about this AFTER the feature is already implemented! -Brent On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:25:27PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

Jon Fairbairn writes:

[...]

...

“\case” complicates lambda, using “of” simply breaks “case … of …” into two easily understood parts.

Just some observation (I'm rather late to the lambda-case discussion, so this might have been already pointed out previously):

if the reserved keyword 'of' was to take the place of '\case', shouldn't then

'case' exp

w/o the "'of' { alts }"-part become a separately valid expression (with 'case' essentially meaning 'flip ($)') to really break it up into two independent parts? Then 'case exp of { alts }' wouldn't be a special form anymore, but would just result from combining 'case' and 'of';

'case' wouldn't even need to be a reserved keyword (and thus the grammar could be simplified), if it wasn't for the current grammar which requires to isolate a \case-expression by using () or $, consider e.g.:

{-# LANGUAGE LambdaCase #-}

import System.Environment

case' :: b -> (b -> c) -> c case' = flip ($)

main = do s <- getArgs

case' s $ \case -- image '\case' was actually '\of' or 'of' [x] -> putStrLn ("Hello " ++ x) _ -> putStrLn "wrong number of arguments given"

just my 2¢

cheers, hvr

_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users