On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 18:19 +0000, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I don't actually use *lists* all that much - or at least not list transformations. And if I'm going to do something complicated, I'll usually write it as a do-expression rather than a comprehension.
Just a random example out of Cabal:
warn verbosity $ "This package indirectly depends on multiple versions of the same " ++ "package. This is highly likely to cause a compile failure.\n" ++ unlines [ "package " ++ display pkg ++ " requires " ++ display (PackageIdentifier name ver) | (name, uses) <- inconsistencies , (pkg, ver) <- uses ]
Pretty concise and clear I think.
Erm... yeah, it's not too bad once I change all the formatting to make it clear what's what.
Wouldn't it be a lot easier as a do-block though?
I don't think so: ++ unlines $ do (name, uses) <- inconsistencies (pkg, ver) <- uses return $ "package " ++ display pkg ++ " requires " ++ display (PackageIdentifier name ver) Of course reasonable people may disagree. It's mostly aesthetics. Duncan