Am Samstag 25 April 2009 08:48:16 schrieb Thomas Davie:
> On 24 Apr 2009, at 14:37, Loup Vaillant wrote:
> > 2009/4/23 Miguel Mitrofanov <miguelim...@yandex.ru>:
> >> On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:17, Thomas Davie wrote:
> >>> Haskell is a very horizontal language, and to limit our horizontal
> >>> space
> >>> seems pretty weird.
> >>
> >> +1. I sometimes use lines up to 200 characters long, when I feel
> >> they would
> >> be more readable.
> >
> > 200 sounds awfully long. Do you have any example?
>
> Sure...
>
> arrow :: forall (~>) b c d e. ( Arrow (~>), Show (d ~> e), Show (c ~>
> d), Show (b ~> c), Show b, Show c, Show d, Show e, Arbitrary (d ~> e),
> Arbitrary (c ~> d), Arbitrary (b ~> c), Arbitrary b, Arbitrary c,
> Arbitrary d, Arbitrary e, EqProp (b ~> e), EqProp (b ~> d), EqProp
> ((b,d) ~> c), EqProp ((b,d) ~> (c,d)), EqProp ((b,e) ~> (d,e)), EqProp
> ((b,d) ~> (c,e)), EqProp b, EqProp c, EqProp d, EqProp e) => b ~>
> (c,d,e) -> TestBatch
>
> >.>
>
> In all seriousness though, that one got broken, but I do find that I
> occasionally have lines around 100 characters that just look silly if
> I break them, this is a good example:
>
> filterNonRoots (GCase e bs ) = filter ((/= e) <^(&&)^>
> (not . (`elem` bs)))
Not that I'd deny that it can sometimes be more readable to have longer lines*,
but in
this example, would
filterNonRoots (GCase e bs )
= filter ((/= e) <^(&&)^> (not . (`elem` bs)))
be any less readable in your opinion?
[*] but I think 200 characters is beyond the limit
>
> Bob
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
