PR Stanley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > after the more specific cases?To put it another way, why doesn't the > interpreter identify the more specific cases and put them before the > general ones.
Given the function foo below, which of the first lines is more specific? No reordering means, that it is obvious that (foo 0 1) results in one. foo :: Int -> Int -> Bool foo x 1 = 1 foo 0 y = 0 foo x y = 2 Regards, Michael Karcher _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
