Dave Bayer wrote: > [...] In the Haskell do expression, every line is equally special, > and type information is used to combine the lines, inserting implied > combinators.[...]
Desugaring do-notation is a syntactic transformation, requiring no type information. (In practice, the parts may be required to have a monadic type, but this is only to get an earlier (hence better) error message, I guess.) > I see potential for a whole language that worked > this way, opened up to let the programmers control this process > without waiting for an implementation to take their suggestions > (think history of arrows) piecemeal. How would you propose to specify such transformations? Greetings, Arie _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
