[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > G'day all. > > Quoting Robert Dockins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > -- The Sequence 'rcons' method takes its arguments in the opposite > > order as the 'lcons' method (for mnemonic purposes). Should the > > arguments to 'rcons' be reversed? > > The argument is that they both take their arguments in the order > that they would do were they implemented with concatenation: > > lcons x xs === [x] ++ xs > rcons xs x === xs ++ [x] > > This certainly makes sense to me. Is there an argument for using > the other order?
The order of rcons is also natural for using in-line, e.g. "xs `rcons` x". -- David Menendez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "In this house, we obey the laws <http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem> | of thermodynamics!" _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell