Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6179251
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 24, 20262026-05-24T00:37:30+00:00 2026-05-24T00:37:30+00:00

I’m doing lists concatenation in the following ways (an example, using GHC): myConcat ::

  • 0

I’m doing lists concatenation in the following ways (an example, using GHC):

myConcat :: [[a]] -> [a]
myConcat xs = foldr (++) [] xs
myConcat    = foldr (++) []

Can someone explain to me please why and how the above definitions work and this one does not:

myConcat xs = foldr (++) []

Is the last line of code intentionally not allowed (for a reason like the constructs might become confusing, it is useless, etc) or is it something deeper, maybe related to currying…

I hope I can shed some light on this, it really puzzles me :/

LATER EDIT: Besides the explanations given below, I’ve found a good source of information on the matter to be the section “Partial function application and currying” from Chap. 4 “Functional Programming” from the book “Real World Haskell”. The book is available freely online.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-24T00:37:31+00:00Added an answer on May 24, 2026 at 12:37 am

    Lets review the different versions:

    myConcat xs = foldr (++) [] xs
    

    This is the usual way, providing an argument, which is consumed by foldr. The type is [[a]] -> [a], because we have an argument of type [[a]] on the left side, which yields [a] when fed to the right side.

    myConcat = foldr (++) []
    

    Here foldr is partially applied, so we return a function which can take an additional argument, a list of lists. So what we get back from the right side is already what we need, it is not a “syntactical suger”, but another way to express the same thing as the first version. The type is again [[a]] -> [a]: We have nothing on the left side, but give back a function of that signature at the right side.

    myConcat xs = foldr (++) []
    

    Here foldr is partially applied as well, and we return a function that can take an argument as before, but our definition has an additional argument xs, which isn’t used on the right side. The compiler doesn’t “know” that it is this argument we want to have applied to the right side. The type is t -> [[a]] -> [a]. Why?

    Assume you have a square function:

    sqr :: Int -> Int 
    sqr x = x*x
    

    What you are doing is essentially the same as providing an addition, unused argument:

    sqr:: Int -> t -> Int 
    sqr x y = x*x
    

    The function still “works”, e.g. sqr 3 "bla" yields 9, but the type signature is off, and the unused argument is… erm, unused. The unused argument has no fixed type, as it can be virtually “anything”, it doesn’t matter. So it gets type variable (t) in the signature.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm using v2.0 of ClassTextile.php, with the following call: $testimonial_text = $textile->TextileRestricted($_POST['testimonial']); ... and
link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
Does anyone know how can I replace this 2 symbol below from the string
That's pretty much it. I'm using Nokogiri to scrape a web page what has
I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an ’ in it. SimpleXML turns this
We're building an app, our first using Rails 3, and we're having to build
I'm making a simple page using Google Maps API 3. My first. One marker
We are using XSLT to translate a RIXML file to XML. Our RIXML contains
I'm trying to decode HTML entries from here NYTimes.com and I cannot figure out
I am currently running into a problem where an element is coming back from

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.