This works, but may not suitable as case. Sometimes it may be hard to
name the function just for branching.
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 11:25 AM Vanessa McHale
For one, you should pattern match rather than using nested ifs, viz.
foo A1 B1 = fun1
Using a case statement on tuples is not necessary.
On 5/17/19 3:12 AM, Magicloud Magiclouds wrote:
Hi, I have trouble describing this clearly. Let me show code directly.
data Rule1 = A1 | A2 | A3 data Rule2 = B1 | B2 | B3
foo a b = if a == A1 then if b == B1 then fun1 else if b == B2 then fun2 else if b == B3 then fun3 else fun4 ...
Basically, Rule1 and Rule2 compose a matrix, for each case of Rule1 and Rule2, I need to do different things. Above is already long and not quite clear, and it is far from complete.
So my question is, is there a way/lib that I can make this clear to read/understand? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.