Ben Franksen
just wanted to drop by to say how much I like the new lambda case extension. I use it all the time and I just *love* how it relieves me from conjuring up dummy variables, which makes teh code not only esier to write but also to read.
[…] should *definitely* go into Haskell'13.
As I was opposed to the suggestion for lambda case I didn’t really follow the discussion of the syntax, but I’m puzzled by the choice. To me it seems obvious that if we are going to do this (as opposed to something more decomposable like lambda-match), we should do it simply by making the “case exp” part of a case expression optional. So the syntax for lambda- case would be of {alts…} and we would then describe case e of {…} as syntactic sugar for (of {…}) (e) Doing it this way doesn’t introduce any new syntactic elements and has fewer tokens at the point of use. I don’t see any need for a \ in the syntax: this is a functional language we are talking about after all. Once we know that “of” introduces a function, that should be enough. -- Jón Fairbairn Jon.Fairbairn@cl.cam.ac.uk