Talk:99 questions/1 to 10
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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)