On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Simon Marlow wrote: > I'm assuming you don't consider the distinction between '::' and ': :' > to be a problem - the justification for this is simple and logical: a > double colon '::' is a reserved symbol, in the same way that 'then' is a > reserved identifier. >
I have to admit that even if it weren't my expectation would be for '::' to parse as one operator and complain (of course, as ': :' the odds of it being used in a situation where it typechecks are rather low). -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] The task of the academic is not to scale great intellectual mountains, but to flatten them. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe