Well, for your example frustration, the leading comma style would sort your
problem nicely. As for the particulars… hmm, not sure. I use leading commas for
both, so I never really noticed.
It may be that since modules simply expose functions to other programs, the
form is syntactically irrelevant except when the module is being loaded.
I am quite curious about it now, though, so I hope there are some more
knowledgeable folks with some input.
On Jul 11, 2011, at 4:49 AM, L Corbijn wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm wondering why the trailing comma is allowed in export syntax, but not in
> record syntax, here an example
> module Foo (
> export1, -- is allowed
> ) where
>
> data Type = Type {
> record1 :: Foo, -- is not allowed
> }
>
> To me this seems quite inconsistent and sometimes quite frustrating, imagine
> the case that you want to temporarily remove the last record:
> data Type = Type {
> record1 :: Foo,
> -- record2 :: Bar
> }
> this would fail due to an extra comma that has to be commented out.
>
> You could of course say that I'm using a bad style, but it remains that it
> seems to be inconsistent to allow a trailing comma in one place and not in
> the other. So is there an reason for this?
>
> Lars Corbijn
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
