Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
I'd be interested to know what others think about this. The
disadvantage with the GHC5 behaviour is that you might see a warning
about "unused f", remove the definition of "f", and thereby provoke a
new warning, for a function "g" that was mentioned in f's right hand
side.[...]
That's exactly the reason why the current behaviour is much better than
the old one, IMHO, so I'd vote for: Keep the status quo.
BTW, C/C++ compilers usually behave in a similar way for file-local entities,
and I think people like it that way.
Cheers,
S.
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
