On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Richard O'Keefe <o...@cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote: > - a somewhat bogus claim about how much of the library you need to > know how to use it (of COURSE you need to know about integers in > order to use an integer operation, what's so bad about that?) > - the claim that + doesn't mean + (this is really an argument about > the scope of + and could have been dealt with by ruling that n+k > is only available when the version of + in scope is the one from > the Prelude)
What's bogus about that claim? Then n+k patterns have type (Integral a) => a, so you need to know about type classes and Integral. Even if it's listed as a reason, you rest assure that the Haskell' committee did consider how widespread the use of n+k was before removing it. Of course, this can only be an educated guess. Of course, n+k will be missed by Haskell obfuscators. I mean, what will we do without (+) + 1 + 1 = (+) ? -- Lennart _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe