Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Paul Hudak wrote:
Minor point, perhaps, but I should mention that : is not special
syntax -- it is a perfectly valid infix constructor.
snip
... but no more confusing than the fact that [f x | x - xs] is
not the same as (map f xs).
Can you explain why? On page 258
Brian Hulley wrote:
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Paul Hudak wrote:
Minor point, perhaps, but I should mention that : is not special
syntax -- it is a perfectly valid infix constructor.
snip
... but no more confusing than the fact that [f x | x - xs] is
not the same as (map f xs).
Can you
Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
... but no more confusing than the fact that [f x | x - xs] is
not the same as (map f xs).
Can you explain why? On page 258 of Paul Hudak's book The Haskell
School of Expression he states that do x- xs; return (f x) is
