On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 06:37:20PM +0100, MR K P SCHUPKE wrote:
> Surely it must be safe to assume a closed class at the top level?
This could be a source of unpleasant surprises, ie. something works
at top level, but breaks when you move it to some module. If by
top level you also mean Main (as opposed to interactive "toplevel"), it
would be much more surprising. I often experiment by writing a single
module program and split it to many modules later.
Anyway, (with extensions) it is possible to write code which would be
broken by closed world at top level, for example:
g :: (forall a. A a => a -> a) -> something
and somewhere else
... (g f) ...
Best regards,
Tom
--
.signature: Too many levels of symbolic links
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
