Nice Idea, though I don't know that I want something that extensive. I was more looking for whether there was a better way I could define the algebraic data type.
Look at SYB (Data.Data, Data.Generics.*). For example, your "symbols" function can be rewritten as
symbols :: Sentence -> [Symbol]
symbols s = nub $ listify (const True) s
"true" is not that simple, because this code is NOT boilerplate - each alternative is valuable by itself.
On 10 Jan 2009, at 23:56, Andrew Wagner wrote:
_______________________________________________All,
Is there some better way to do this? It seems like a lot of boilerplate. Thanks!
http://hpaste.org/13807#a1
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe