I've been using Haskell daily for a long time, and I didn't know about that underscore convention. I knew about _ being an unspecified dummy variable, but I didn't know you are allowed to follow it with a meaningful name. Guess I have some reading to do. :) -----Original Message----- From: libraries-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:libraries-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Chris Kuklewicz Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 11:31 AM To: Philippa Cowderoy Cc: libraries@haskell.org; Simon Marlow Subject: Re: Good Haskell Style Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Simon Marlow wrote:
I'm rather attached to the convention I use, which is
- CamelCase for exported identifiers - underscores otherwise <snip> Yes I'm aware that a single-word identifier is the same in both conventions; it's not perfect.
How about _nonexportedIdentifier or something similar?
Leading underscores are used in pattern matches to indicate to GHC that unused names like '_foo' should not cause a warning to be printed. Otherwise the warning is turned off by using just '_' but that erases the readability of using an actual name. Thus: take _ [] = [] -- no warning take n [] = [] -- warning that n is unused take _n [] = [] -- no warning _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries