The Author Online Book Forums are Moving

The Author Online Book Forums will soon redirect to Manning's liveBook and liveVideo. All book forum content will migrate to liveBook's discussion forum and all video forum content will migrate to liveVideo. Log in to liveBook or liveVideo with your Manning credentials to join the discussion!

Thank you for your engagement in the AoF over the years! We look forward to offering you a more enhanced forum experience.

288366 (4) [Avatar] Offline
#1
I feel that using '*>' for input and '>' for output is confusing.

I'd recommend simply replacing 'Prelude>' with '>' and leaving output alone.

The listings would look like this:

> let x = 2 + 2
> x
4
> let f x = x + x
> f 2
4

which is pretty much what the user sees in the console anyway.
Will Kurt (21) [Avatar] Offline
#2
I agree. The one downside of using '>' is that it is also used in literate Haskell for code. This is potentially confusing for readers and it makes it more annoying for me when transferring notes from literate Haskell to the book. How would you feel about substituting 'Prelude>' for 'GHCi>' and then leaving the output with no preceding character as you recommend? This would conserve space in the text as well as making it more clear that "we're doing GHCi now".
techstep (1) [Avatar] Offline
#3
Another point of confusion: When I start ghci, I get Prelude> as the prompt, without the leading asterisk. When I start it with a file, or load in a Haskell file, I do see the asterisk. It's not clear from the text what the asterisk actually means in a GHCi prompt, and the overloading with *> for input just confuses the matter further.