Jason Dagit wrote: > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:26 AM, david48 <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Neil Mitchell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> That seems a really weird way to write it! Who decided all auxiliary >>> functions should be called go? (I think I'm blaming dons) - why not: >>> >>> sffi :: (Integral a,Num a) => Integer -> Maybe a >>> sffi n | toInteger n2 == n = Just n2 >>> | otherwise = Nothing >>> where n2 = fromInteger n >> >> I know I was too lazy to clean it up :-P >> ( I also blame Dons for 'go' ) > > I think the Common Lisp community tends to use 'foo-aux' instead of > 'go' for these sort of axillary functions. But, then in Haskell we > can't use hyphen as an identify character and underscore is not > popular. For this reason I started using fooAux in Haskell, but after > learning that a single quote is valid identifier character I started > using foo'. > > Other than using go and foo', what do people use in Haskell?
You could combine Lisp and Haskell and say foo'aux :-) Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
