> > You (Graham) also have > >some parentheses issues; e.g. in foo ++ (combinations 5 l) the > >parentheses are superfluous. > > I'm tempted to argue that being superfluous doesn't mean they shouldn't be > there. This isn't just a functional programming issue... I find that when > there are many levels of operator precedence it's easier to be explicit > than to try and remember what they all are -- as much for reading the code > as writing it in the first place. But maybe I'm still reading functional > code in the wrong way? (I still scratch my head over some of the > prelude/library functions, though it's getting easier.)
This is a particular instance where you never need the parentheses... since it's a _functional_ language, _function application_ (the invisible symbol between combinations and 5, and between combinations 5 and l) binds tighter than anything else. The only time you need parentheses around a function application are when it is to protect it from a competing function application, such as when you are passing it as an argument to a function: map (map f) xss rather than map map f xss HTH. --KW 8-) _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
