David Virebayre wrote:
Gregory Crosswhite wrote:
Also, I don't see why one would prefer >>> over the standard function
composition operator, ".".
With "." you have to read right-to-left to follow data's path.
For me that reading order isn't natural, and I imagine it is so for
most people wh
Uwe Schmidt wrote:
In HXT, the concept of a filter is the most important one. This
concept is a natural generalisation of a function (and that's what
arrows are). A user has to grasp this idea of a filter. And he/she
can do this even without knowing anything about arrows or monads.
People knowing
C. McCann wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Combined with >>= / >> you have multiple reading direction in the same
expression, as in
expression ( c . b . a ) `liftM` a1 >>= a2 >>= a3
reading order 6 5 41 2 3
That's why I'm usually using =<< instead of >>= .
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Personally, I would be much happier with the slogan "HXT = XML
transformations with filters". Browsing through Manuel's thesis, I
discover that your combinators are quite slick ( >>> , choiceA , when,
guards ), it's just that they are a very speci
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Heinrich Apfelmus
wrote:
>> Combined with >>= / >> you have multiple reading direction in the same
>> expression, as in
>>
>> expression ( c . b . a ) `liftM` a1 >>= a2 >>= a3
>> reading order 6 5 4 1 2 3
>
> That's why I'm usually
On 15 Oct 2010, at 10:44, Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Personally, I would be much happier with the slogan "HXT = XML
transformations with filters". Browsing through Manuel's thesis, I
discover that your combinators are quite slick ( >>> , choiceA , when,
guards ), it's just that they are a very sp
15.10.2010 15:03, Malcolm Wallace пишет:
>
> On 15 Oct 2010, at 10:44, Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I would be much happier with the slogan "HXT = XML
>> transformations with filters". Browsing through Manuel's thesis, I
>> discover that your combinators are quite slick ( >>> , choice
