Talk:99 questions/1 to 10: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
The function signature and description of what it is to do should be given. The solutions should be on some separate page. | The function signature and description of what it is to do should be given. The solutions should be on some separate page. | ||
+1, especially the solutions on separate page. [[User:Oligomous|Oligomous]] 18:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC) | : +1, especially the solutions on separate page. [[User:Oligomous|Oligomous]] 18:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
==Does the problem 1 example need correction?== | ==Does the problem 1 example need correction?== | ||
Revision as of 18:16, 8 December 2009
Bad format
The format of this page is awful. I'm collecting the problem descriptions, but having to be very careful not to look at the solutions.
The function signature and description of what it is to do should be given. The solutions should be on some separate page.
- +1, especially the solutions on separate page. Oligomous 18:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Does the problem 1 example need correction?
The problem refers us to last as a Prelude function providing the same functionality. However, last has type [a] -> a which differs from the Lisp example's type [a] -> [a]. Should we revise the example or should we rephrase the reference to last to highlight the difference?
Chrycheng 12:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I think the answer to problem 6 is kind of "cheating". I think something like this would be a nice alternate solutions:
isPalindrome :: Eq (a) => [a] -> Bool
isPalindrome [] = True
isPalindrome [x] = True
isPalindrome (x:xs) = x == last xs && isPalindrome (init xs)Michael 16:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)