12 Nov
2012
12 Nov
'12
6:02 a.m.
On 12 November 2012 11:34, Bas van Dijk
I just realized that mapAccumL' is not needed since the caller has the ability to force the accumlator. So please ignore that part of my proposal. This leaves just scanl' and scanl1' as orignally proposed by Niklas Hambüchen.
Oops scrap that. After thinking about it more and testing it I realize the caller really doesn't have control over the evaluation order in the function passed to mapAccumL. So please consider my original proposal again. Sorry for the noise. Bas