manip trees: split off last section into monad_transformers

[lambda.git] / translating_between_OCaml_Scheme_and_Haskell.mdwn

diff --git a/translating_between_OCaml_Scheme_and_Haskell.mdwn b/translating_between_OCaml_Scheme_and_Haskell.mdwn
index e76bab4..d0f7442 100644 (file)
--- a/translating_between_OCaml_Scheme_and_Haskell.mdwn
+++ b/translating_between_OCaml_Scheme_and_Haskell.mdwn
@@ -131,7 +131,8 @@ Additionally, the syntax of OCaml and SML is superficially much closer to Haskel
 
        There is also a library for using *undelimited* continuations in OCaml, but it's shakier than Oleg's delimited continuation library.
 
-We won't say any more about translating to and from Scheme.
+There are some more hints about Scheme [here](/assignment8/) and [here](/week1/). We won't say any more here.
+
 
 
 #Haskell and OCaml#
@@ -139,9 +140,9 @@ We won't say any more about translating to and from Scheme.
 We will however try to give some general advice about how to translate between OCaml and Haskell.
 
 *      Again, it may sometimes be useful to [try Haskell in your web browser](http://tryhaskell.org/)
-*      There are many Haskell tutorials and textbooks available. This is probably the most actively developed: [Haskell Wikibook](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell)
-*      [Yet Another Haskell Tutorial](http://www.cs.utah.edu/~hal/docs/daume02yaht.pdf) (much of this excellent book has supposedly been integrated into the Haskell Wikibook)
-*      All About Monads has supposedly also been integrated into the Haskell Wikibook
+*      There are many Haskell tutorials and textbooks available. This is probably the most actively developed: [Haskell wikibook](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell)
+*      [Yet Another Haskell Tutorial](http://www.cs.utah.edu/~hal/docs/daume02yaht.pdf) (much of this excellent book has supposedly been integrated into the Haskell wikibook)
+*      All About Monads has supposedly also been integrated into the Haskell wikibook
 *      (A not-so-)[Gentle Introduction to Haskell](http://web.archive.org/web/http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/) (archived)
 *      [Learn You a Haskell for Great Good](http://learnyouahaskell.com/)
 
@@ -198,6 +199,12 @@ We will however try to give some general advice about how to translate between O
                type person = name * address;;
                type 'a personal_data = PD of 'a;;
 
+*      When a type only has a single variant, as with PersonalData, Haskell programmers will often use the same name for both the type and the value constructor, like this:
+
+               data PersonalData a = PersonalData a
+
+       The interpreter can always tell from the context when you're using the type name and when you're using the value constructor.
+
 *      The type constructors discussed above took simple types as arguments. In Haskell, types are also allowed to take *type constructors* as arguments:
 
                data BarType t = Bint (t Integer) | Bstring (t string)
@@ -663,6 +670,11 @@ Haskell has more built-in support for monads, but one can define the monads one
 
        which can be translated straightforwardly into OCaml.
 
+       For more details, see:
+
+       *       [Haskell wikibook on do-notation](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/do_Notation)
+       *       [Do-notation considered harmful](http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Do_notation_considered_harmful)
+
 *      If you like the Haskell do-notation, there's [a library](http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/~carette/pa_monad/) you can compile and install to let you use something similar in OCaml.
 
 *      In order to do any printing, Haskell has to use a special `IO` monad. So programs will look like this: