John Meacham wrote:
you can make things somewhat better with this construct
foo = do
baz
if cond then return bar else do
bua
bam
Except that this is invalid according to the Haskell report. In note 1
in section 9.3 (Layout), the report explicitly states that "A nes
This actually does do the work, although I don't understand why an extra
indentation is not needed.
The "do" gives me a big surprise.
Hal Daume III
<[E
You can also do something like:
myfunction = do
...
if somecondition then return 5 else do
more stuff here
if someothercondition then return 6 else do
more stuff here
return 7
which will do what you want
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Thanks you guys. I r
Thanks you guys. I really love this mail list. Can always learn nice tips
from experienced people here. :-)
I guess I'll go with the guard suggestion. ContT is nice, but don't want to
introduce too much extras to the program just for syntax reason.
I do agree with you, Graham. Actually
do
d
Hello all,
The Haskell98 Report, in its printed form, uses Times
and Courier fonts. I would like to have the Report printed
in the TeX-standard cm family of fonts (including the tt font
which I like much more than Courier as a `computer font').
Some time ago, I tried to do this from the sources i
Is this possible at all?
I don't think so, in the form that you suggest.
Ultimately, it all comes down to function applications, for which there is
no such "bail out". Rather, I think something like this is required:
do
{ ...
; if cond then return 1
else do
(the rest)
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 06:27:32PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> While writing monad programs, I sometimes want to do a return as it is in
> imperative program. i.e.,
> do{return 1; return 2} is same as return 1
> I know I can do
> if cond then return 1 else (
> ...--subsequent actions
> )
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 06:27:32PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> While writing monad programs, I sometimes want to do a return as it is in
> imperative program. i.e.,
> do{return 1; return 2} is same as return 1
>
> Is this possible at all?
Someone already proposed an Error monad, but I
On 2004-04-29T18:27:32-0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> While writing monad programs, I sometimes want to do a return as it is in
> imperative program. i.e.,
> do{return 1; return 2} is same as return 1
Hello,
You can build an error monad transformer along the lines of the
Control.Monad.Error mod
CALL FOR PAPERS
The Second ASIAN Symposium on
Programming Languages and Systems
(APLAS 2004)
Taipei, Taiwan, November 4-6 2004
http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~aplas
(co-located with ATVA 2004 in Taipei)
11 matches
Mail list logo
