On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Richard O'Keefe <o...@cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
>> My preferred way to increase the readability of code is to
>> keep names short and *limited in scope*.
>
> That's good. Haskell code is chock full of one and two letter
> highly local identifiers.
I am actually rather ambivalent to this practice. I was referring
more to the 4-8 letter, 1-2 word range: functions named "collect" or
"diagonals" or "split". A name like this together with a type
signature is frequently enough to uniquely identify the function in
question; without a good name, not so much.
I find one and two letter identifiers the best way in a few
situations, eg. in "map (x:xs) = ...", where there is hardly a better
name for them ("head" and "tail" perhaps... but it is blindly clear
from context what they are...). On the other hand, a function like
Martin Escardo's:
> find_vii :: (Cantor -> Bool) -> Cantor
> find_vii p = b
> where b = id'(\n -> if q n (find_vii(q n)) then Zero else One)
> q n a = p(\i -> if i < n then b i else if i == n then Zero else
> a(i-n-1))
is pretty rough reading for me.
Luke
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
