On 22-May-2000, Koen Claessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think there are two separate issues here:
...
> 2. Syntactic sugar which is translated away using prelude
> functions.
...
> Issue number 2 is completely different and unrelated. Note
> that this also includes normal prelude functions without
> special syntax (such as >>=, return, mfail, fromInteger,
> etc.). What happens in general when one uses this special
> notation in a module which redefines these operators? I
> think the easiest thing to do is just to make the
> translation *always* refer to their prelude definitions.
That may well be the *easiest* thing to do, but the question
we should be asking is what is the *best* thing to do.
The easiest thing has been tried already, and -- dare I say it --
found wanting!
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
