
Yes, this was an old draft I accidentally sent out.
My post higher up the thread is correct. :)
On Tuesday, June 8, 2010, Ozgur Akgun
if we add 'a' to the definition of this function, (to make it work), the type of it turns out to be: [a] -> [(a, Bool)]
you might have forgotten the "map fst $" part.
Best,
On 8 June 2010 14:51, Bill Atkins
wrote: f :: [a] -> [a] f = filter snd $ zip a (cycle [True, False])
On Monday, June 7, 2010, Ozgur Akgun
wrote: or, since you don't need to give a name to the second element of the list:
f :: [a] -> [a] f (x:_:xs) = x : f xsf x = x
On 7 June 2010 20:11, Ozgur Akgun
wrote: i think explicit recursion is quite clean?
f :: [a] -> [a]f (x:y:zs) = x : f zs
f x = x
On 7 June 2010 19:42, Thomas Hartman
wrote: maybe this? map snd . filter (odd . fst) . zip [1,2..] $ [1,2,3,4,5]
2010/6/6 R J
: What's the cleanest definition for a function f :: [a] -> [a] that takes a list and returns the same list, with alternate items removed? e.g., f [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] = [1,3,5]?
________________________________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
-- Ozgur Akgun
-- Ozgur Akgun
-- Ozgur Akgun