G'day. Quoting wren ng thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm sure you know *why* it's an infinite list[1], but as for why that's useful I can't say. It has the feel of a bug in implementation, though it is ...consistent.
Right. I have no problem with [5,5..5] being logically an anamorphism, but thinking abstractly about what I'd want it to mean, I'm pretty sure I don't want it to mean an infinite list of 5's. I asked a class of about a dozen bright undergrads about 10 years ago what they thought it should mean, and IIRC the consensus seemed to be split between [5] and [5,5]. Nobody correctly guessed what it actually did. So whether the behaviour is technically right or wrong, it violates the Principle of Least Surprise. Cheers, Andrew Bromage _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
