13 Nov
2006
13 Nov
'06
5:25 a.m.
john:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 02:27:12PM +1100, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
I'm we're going to use this forever more, then a name more meaningful than repeatM_ might be appropriate (personally, I have to check every time whether it is replicate or repeat that is :: Int -> a -> [a]).
now it will be three times easier to remember, as you only need to remember what one of repeat, repeatM, and repeatM_ do to easily determine what the other two do. standard naming conventions are very nice when they fit so well, as they do in this case.
Ok :) I'll resubmit 'repeatM_' as a separate patch. -- Don