Thu, 9 Aug 2001 09:27:40 +0200, Florian Hars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> Yes, getting a sytax error if I write (x-1)*(-x-1) is a real stumbling block.
It's not a syntax error.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
\__/
^^ SYGNATURA Z
Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:20:49 -0700, Memovich, Gary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> As long as were trying to clean up a final version of the Haskell
> 98 report, lets simplify it a little by getting rid of unary minus.
I'm against removing it, even if compatibility was not an issue.
Yes, it's an irreg
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 10:12:46AM +1000, Richard Watson wrote:
> I'd like to add my vote for this. Its removal would result in a nicer language
> specification, and would remove a obstacle that novice programmers sometimes
> stumble over.
Yes, getting a sytax error if I write (x-1)*(-x-1) is a r
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> I totally agree with Gary. In my opinion the unary minus is a anomaly in
> Haskell which causes a lot of problems while beeing not that useful. For me
> it is totally okay to use negate x instead of -x.
>
> Gary wrote:
> >
> > As long as were tryi
Hello,
I totally agree with Gary. In my opinion the unary minus is a anomaly in
Haskell which causes a lot of problems while beeing not that useful. For me
it is totally okay to use negate x instead of -x.
Wolfgang
Gary wrote:
> Hello people,
> I've been studying the Haskell 98 report as part
