Peter Douglass writes: : | but in ( foo ( bar (baz x) ) ) | | You would want the following I think. | | foo . bar . baz x | | which does have the parens omitted, but requires the composition | operator. Almost. To preserve the meaning, the composition syntax would need to be (foo . bar . baz) x or foo . bar . baz $ x or something along those lines. I favour the one with parens around the dotty part, and tend to use $ only when a closing paren is threatening to disappear over the horizon. do ... return $ case ... of ... -- many lines Regards, Tom _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
- Re: Functional programming in Python Kellomaki Pertti
- Re: Functional programming in Python Arjan van IJzendoorn
- Re: Functional programming in Python Paul Hudak
- Re: Functional programming in Python Kellomaki Pertti
- Re: Functional programming in Python Paul Hudak
- RE: Functional programming in Python brk
- Re: Functional programming in Python Dean Herington
- Re: Functional programming in Python Peter Hancock
- Re: Functional programming in Python Peter Hancock
- RE: Functional programming in Python Peter Douglass
- RE: Functional programming in Python Tom Pledger
- RE: Functional programming in Python S. Alexander Jacobson
- RE: Functional programming in Python Malcolm Wallace
- Re: Functional programming in Python Zhanyong Wan
- Re: Functional programming in Python S. Alexander Jacobson
- Re: Functional programming in Python Tom Pledger
- Re: Functional programming in Python Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza
- Re: Functional programming in Python Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Functional programming in Python Jerzy Karczmarczuk
- Re: Functional programming in Python Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Functional programming in Python Ketil Malde