On 07/19/2012 05:03 PM, Petr Janda wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
Not if "eliminating noise" equals to making things harder to understand.
Harder to understand to whom? Optimizing stuff for beginners usually
makes it a PITA to work with.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a
_function_ without name.
That expression looks eg. like this in Haskell:
\x->x
(If the type of x cannot be inferred to Int, then it is (\x->x)::Int->Int)
I agree that there is some non-uniformity. It should be possible to use
=> in named function declarations.
