Simon,
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 02:28:45AM -0800, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > > | I am also curious why, for example, > | > | row :: (Ix a, Ix b) => a -> Array (a,b) c -> Array b c > | row i x = ixmap (l',u') (\j->(i,j)) x where ((l,l'),(u,u')) > | = bounds x > | > | isn't written as > | > | row :: (Ix a, Ix b) => a -> Array (a,b) c -> Array b c > | row i x = ixmap (l,u) (\j->(i,j)) x where ((_,l),(_,u)) = bounds x > | ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ > > you can write it either way I agree that the two are equivalent definitions, I just find the latter style easier to follow. Similarly I would write "new_is = map fst new_ivs" rather than "new_is = [i | (i,_) <- new_ivs]" - maybe this is just a personal taste thing. Certainly not worth quibbling over at any rate :-) Another one for you: In 10.3 (Monad, Functions) the listFile example uses openFile where it means readFile. Another minor quibble: the use of brackets around contexts isn't consistent within the Monad section (haven't looked at the others). Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
