gconsym

[Ian Lynagh]

Just to make sure I am interpreting the report correctly, is ":" meant
to be a valid qconop regardless of the precedence-level and
associativity of the qconop?


Thanks
Ian


_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe