On Nov 5, 2009, at 6:26 PM, Jonathan Daugherty wrote:
So we could write:
myFunc = anotherFunc $ case of Left err -> print err Right msg -> putStrLn msg
A minor syntactical addition, a big win!
+1.
While we're on the topic, what do people think of a related problem, case expressions over monadic values? I run into this often enough that it's a pain. I'd like to take
result <- act1 case result of ... -> actN
and drop the bind entirely to get
case act1 of ... -> actN
I know that there are many helper functions and constructs to make this sort of thing more readable, but sometimes a case expression is a good fit and the preceding bind just ends up being noisy.
-- Jonathan Daugherty
I think your example is ambiguous in the sense that the case cannot know whether it should pattern match on the entire `m a' or just on the value `a' pulled out of the monad . Or maybe I don't entirely understand your example. With the proposed `case of' it would become something like this: act1 >>= case of ... -> actN Cheers, Sebastiaan