[Haskell-cafe] Re: Re: data structures question

[Benjamin Franksen]

Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
> Benjamin Franksen wrote:
>> Matthias Fischmann wrote:
>>> The trick is that Int is not the only index data type, but tuples of
>>> index data types are, too.  Do this:
>>>
>>> | type Point = (State, State, Int)
>>> | type TypeV = Array State Double
>>> | 
>>> | matrix :: TypeV
>>> | matrix = array bounds values
>>> |    where
>>> |    ...
>> 
>> Surely you meant to say
>> 
>> | type TypeV = Array Point Double
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Ben
> 
> And
> 
> type Value = Double
> newtype PointNat = PointNat Int deriving (...Ix)
> type Point = (State,State,PointNat)
> 
> Or even
> 
> type TypeVof a = Array PointNat a
> type TypeV = TypeVof Value
> 
> I did not even run the code I wrote through ghci, I was just showing what
> it could look like.
> 
> And stop calling me Shirley.

Dear Chris,

Could you please be a bit more explicit? Have I offended anyone? Or else,
how do I have to understand this comment other than as a rebuke? And how
comes you answer this as if you were the one who posted the code, and not a
person named Matthias Fischmann?

Please note that English is not my native tongue so there is always the
possibility that I misunderstood something, or that I express myself badly
and so cause misunderstandings. Is the expression "Surely you meant to say
<whatever>" perceived as offending or arrogant, perhaps? In this case I
would gladly apologize and assure everyone that this was not intended!

I posted this correction only in order to avoid confusion for the OP, who
described himself as a beginner with regard to Haskell. I didn't mean to be
nitpicking or anything like that. If I have made a mistake, either
technically or by chosing the wrong words, then please tell me so.

Your answer to my other posting today is of a similar nature, i.e.
completely obscure to me, and totally disregarding the essence of my
question. If there is something personal involved here (for which I can't
imagine any reason other than the above mentioned one) maybe it would be
better to clearly say so (and sort this out in private and not on this
list).

Clueless,
Ben