Hi, > But I'm just writing this to let you guys know (surely you know this > already) that anyone from a C/C++/Java/Delphi background is going to > completely misunderstand the meaning of A.anything in Haskell... it's > completely nonintuitive to people with my background.
Surely this is no worse than misunderstanding '=', as in: > f n = n + 1 is it? I'd say of all the hurdles going from C++-esque to Haskell, the A.foo is one of the least troubling (I could be wrong and would like to know if I am). > Haskell to me seems to be a great language with a syntax problem, and a bad > case of too many ways to do the same thing; thus every programmer does I've always thought it the opposite :). Let vs. where can be somewhat confusing, and it is largely a matter of style, but they're not completely interchangable, esp. in the presence of, say guards, ie.: > f x | x < 0 = foo x > | x > 0 = foo (-x) > where foo y = ... could not be done with a let. My 2 cents... - Hal _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
