undefined | Better HN

0 pointsedflsafoiewq6y ago0 comments

It is related. In point-free style the "omitted" parameters have to be distinguished positionally; they have no names at all, not even 'a' or 'b'.

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

nmca6y ago· 1 in thread

^^^^^ This is extremely insightful, and now ranks as the most accurate and succinct explanation I've seen of why point-free is terrible.

monoideism6y ago

It's not extremely insightful. It's literally the definition of point-free style.

Also, Haskell doesn't have labeled/keyword function parameters, regardless of whether or not you use point-free style. Sometimes, people pass in a record to achieve a similar effect, but in general, passing in a ton of parameters goes against idiomatic Haskell style.

monoideism6y ago

> In point-free style the "omitted" parameters have to be distinguished positionally; they have no names at all, not even 'a' or 'b

Yes, that's literally the definition of point-free style.

I was referring to labeling function parameters `a` and `b`.

Also, when I checked, that's actually not what the FGL library does. It labels type parameters with `a` and `b`. Labeling generics and type parameters with letters of the alphabet is pretty typical for a wide range of languages (ie, `T` in Java, etc.). Arguably, it's a bad idea, but it's by no means unique to Haskell.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse