1 Jul
2007
1 Jul
'07
1:09 p.m.
Stefan O'Rear wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 05:06:10PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Um... shouldn't that read abstract v (a :@ b) = S :@ (transform (abstract v) a) :@: (transform (abstract v) b)
No, because the whole point of transform is that it handles recursion for you.
OK. Well in that case, I have no idea what transform is doing... (I assumed it was just applying some function to every part of the structure - but that wouldn't solve this case.)
(However, there is a bug! abstracting an unrecognized form (that is, a primitive combinator) should add a K.)
I'm going to have to take some time to bend my mind around that one too... (Does anybody else on this list frequently get the feeling their IQ is just too low for Haskell??)