Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:20:49 -0700, Memovich, Gary <GARY.MEMOVICH@kla-tencor.com> pisze:
As long as were trying to clean up a final version of the Haskell 98 report, lets simplify it a little by getting rid of unary minus.
I'm against removing it, even if compatibility was not an issue. Yes, it's an irregularity. But it's convenient, readable, and it allows using negative constants in patterns. -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak@knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/ \__/ ^^ SYGNATURA ZASTÊPCZA QRCZAK
[Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak@knm.org.pl>]
Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:20:49 -0700, Memovich, Gary <GARY.MEMOVICH@kla-tencor.com> pisze:
As long as were trying to clean up a final version of the Haskell 98 report, lets simplify it a little by getting rid of unary minus.
I'm against removing it, even if compatibility was not an issue.
Yes, it's an irregularity. But it's convenient, readable, and it allows using negative constants in patterns.
well, weird inconsistencies aside, negative constants could still be allowed by adding an optional initial '-' to the lexical specification of numeric constants... not that i really think that's the best option... i think people would be pretty frustrated if "-56.2" worked but not "-x"... m -- matt hellige matt@immute.net http://matt.immute.net
matt hellige:
... i think people would be pretty frustrated if "-56.2" worked but not "-x"...
Weell, the Cleaners around have to live with it. -5 works. For variables they write ~x. But "-" in front of a number is not a lexical entity, but a syntactic one, so f -5 and f (-5) are a bit different. I didn't follow this discussion, but please avoid this mess in Haskell. Jerzy Karczmarczuk
participants (3)
-
Jerzy Karczmarczuk -
Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk -
matt hellige