Benjamin Franksen writes: > On Monday 01 November 2004 23:40, Jon Fairbairn wrote: > > Apart from matching up with the names there's not much to > > choose between one destructor and many, except possibly when > > one considers something like: > > > > Â Âcase e of > > Â Â ÂSquare s -> ... > > Â Â Â_ -> ... > > > > particularly if the type has more than two constructors. > > True. Anyway, we don't really want to abandon pattern matching > syntax, do we?
Explicit destructor functions are nice when working in a point-free fashion. Consider these: c1 = someComputation >>= maybe mzero return c2 = do x <- someComputation case x of Just x' -> return x' Nothing -> mzero On the other hand, this function (which I actually have in my code) may be over-doing it: swap = maybe (Right Nothing) (either Left (Right . Just)) -- David Menendez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/> _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe