Technically this is trivial it seems. I think that some people consider this proposal a problem because typos (misspelled type parameters) immediately lead to the accidental exploration of a more advanced type-system feature and correspondingly more involved error messages. Of course, the type checker could perhaps consider adding "Did you really mean to ...?".
Ralf > I once read a paper about type classes and existentials (can't remember > exact title or author, was it Läufer?) where the proposal was to make > existential quantification implicit (just as the universal one is in > Haskell98). That is, any type variable that appears on the rhs of a > data type, but not on the lhs, is implicitly existentially quantified, > as in > > data XWrap = Show a => XWrap a > > I always thought this was a pretty nice idea. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
