RE: [Template-haskell] Release
| Moreover, I would like to propose the following: | | * Use a naming scheme for the functions that avoids having | to suffix some with "E" or "D" and some not. Example: we | have "cond", but "letE". Better *uniformly* use a single | suffix for all functions of the same class; eg, "condExp" | and "letExp" (or "condE" and "letE" if you desperately | want to save letters). | | * Get rid of the intriguing (but IMHO impractical) idea of | using mnemonics of a particular length for variants data | types. Example: we have "Mat" and "Mtch" as well as "Rhs" | and "Rihs", where the four letter variant is in the Q | monad. The distinction between "Mat" and "Match" etc will | vanish once we get rid of the two-level type scheme. Then | we can just have "Match" and "MatchQ" together with "Rhs" | and "RhsQ" and so on. I have no axe to grind here. As far as I am concerned, anything that meets with others' approval is fine with me. So, you merry and select band of TH users, speak up now, else Ian and Manuel will change it anyway! Simon
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:39:39AM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
So, you merry and select band of TH users, speak up now, else Ian and Manuel will change it anyway!
OK, I'm going to start making the changes now as I haven't seen any objections, starting with the type parameterisation.
| * Use a naming scheme for the functions that avoids having | to suffix some with "E" or "D" and some not. Example: we | have "cond", but "letE". Better *uniformly* use a single | suffix for all functions of the same class; eg, "condExp" | and "letExp" (or "condE" and "letE" if you desperately | want to save letters).
Looks like Exp will do as there have been no requests for E!
| * Get rid of the intriguing (but IMHO impractical) idea of | using mnemonics of a particular length for variants data | types. Example: we have "Mat" and "Mtch" as well as "Rhs" | and "Rihs", where the four letter variant is in the Q | monad. The distinction between "Mat" and "Match" etc will | vanish once we get rid of the two-level type scheme. Then | we can just have "Match" and "MatchQ" together with "Rhs" | and "RhsQ" and so on.
Would you prefer this over QMatch? I'm not really fussed, but all things being equal QMatch = Q Match makes slightly more sense to me. Thanks Ian
participants (2)
-
Ian Lynagh -
Simon Peyton-Jones