Hi Jan,
What you're suggesting is called "non-linear patterns", and it's a
perfectly sensible, well-defined feature in a language with
pattern-matching. As you point out, non-linearity allows for more direct &
succinct programming. I've often wished for this feature when writing
optimizations on data types, especially for syntactic types (languages).
As Ivan mentioned, there is some danger that people may accidentally a
non-linear pattern accidentally, and perhaps the early Haskell designers
chose the linearity restriction out of this worry. The importance of such
dangers is a subjective call, and certainly not one carried out
consistently in Haskell. Consider, for instance, the choice that let &
where bindings are recursive by default in Haskell, unlike ML and Lisp. I
like this choice, but I can understand objections that it leads to
accidental recursions, especially for non-functions.
-- Conal
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:11 AM, Jan Stolarek
You can achieve something similar with the ViewPatterns language extension.
member _ [] = False member x (((x ==) -> True) : _) = True member x (_ : xs) = member x xs Hi Tillmann,
there are a couple of ways to achieve this in Haskell, for example using guards:
member :: Eq a => a -> [a] -> Bool member _ [] = False member y (x:_) | x == y = True member y (_:xs) = member y xs
The goal of my proposal is to provide a concise syntax, whereas ViewPatterns are very verbose and guards are slightly verbose. I want something simple and something that is very intuitive if you've programmed in Prolog :)
Janek
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe