Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much

Re^7: 99 Problems in Perl6

by TimToady (Parson)
on Dec 15, 2006 at 23:31 UTC ( #590154=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^6: 99 Problems in Perl6
in thread 99 Problems in Perl6

And indeed, you can do that in Perl too:
multi compress () { () } multi compress ($a) { item $a } multi compress ($x, $y, *@xs) { $x xx ($x !=== $y), compress($y, |@xs) + } my @x = <a a a a b c c a a d e e e e>; say perl compress |@x;

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: 99 Problems in Perl6
by gaal (Parson) on Dec 15, 2006 at 23:44 UTC
    Didn't we end up using when for guards? The problem with multis for this I seem to remember was that it was hard to spec their order if they're defined in separate compilation units.
      We'll support matching against sigs using when if you really want ordered guards, but multis are defined to ignore ordering, so it doesn't matter where they're defined, in this file or in any other file. Only the type semantics of the signature matter. Overuse of ordered guards is actually kind of a semantic flaw in Haskell, I think. It's a way of sneaking in sequential dependencies without a monad.
        Pure variants like this one are desugared into a case:

        compress x = case x of [] -> [] [a] -> [a] -- singleton list (x:y:xs) -> (if x == y then [] else [x]) ++ compress (y:xs)

        And can do no monadic monkey business because compress is pure. In this they are simply a more convenient way of spelling out some branches. You wouldn't say if is a sneaky way of doing sequential dependencies, would you?

        Sure, with a monadic function you can also have pattern guards that do monadic stuff, but I don't think you can bind without noticing, and in any case the function type will tell you it's monadic.

        Ordered variants in Haskell let you do things like

        funky (x:y:xs) = ... -- I'm guaranteed to have two elements or more funky (x:xs) = ... {- This pattern would have matched a long list, b +ut since the previous variant came first, we know the l +ist is of length 1 or 2. * -}

        This is incredibly useful sometimes. Okay, when I want when I know where to find it. :-)

        * For folks not familiar with Haskell who count three or two items in the two patterns and don't see why I'm talking of lists of at least two and one or two elements respectively: in Haskell, "(a:b)" means a is an element and b is a list of zero or more elements. That's why by convention you see names like "xs" and "ys", pronounced "exes" and "whys", though there's nothing in the language to enforce names like that. The expression (x:y:xs) means (x:(y:xs)).

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://590154]
[Tanktalus]: Opposite of me - I chat irregularly and rarely visit. :D

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (2)
As of 2017-04-28 15:43 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    I'm a fool:

    Results (525 votes). Check out past polls.