On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you can suggest improvements to the manual I'm all ears. Notably, it says > nothing about what "rigid" means or how it propagates.
A good solid definition of rigid would be nice. You pointed me at a paper on wobbly types that I found to be quite helpful in my understanding of the type checking issues. The paper told me that roughly speaking rigid means explicit. Once I was armed with just that information I started tackling more and more of these type check problems. Thanks, Jason _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
