On Tuesday 08 March 2011 00:58:36, Alexander Solla wrote: > > As a matter of fact, if you read GHC.Prim, you will see that seq is a > bottom!
No, you don't. GHC.Prim is a dummy module whose only purpose is to let haddock generate documentation. Every function there has the code let x = x in x, e.g. plusWord# :: Word# -> Word# -> Word# plusWord# = let x = x in x minusWord# :: Word# -> Word# -> Word# minusWord# = let x = x in x undefined is not yet available, otherwise probably everything in GHC.Prim would be pseudo-defined as undefined for haddock. > > seq :: a -> b -> b > seq = let x = x in x > > The "magic" semantics of evaluating the first argument are done by the > compiler/runtime, and are apparently not expressible in Haskell. Right. But neither is addition of Word# etc., for the primitives, you have to do something special. > This is true of > inline > lazy > unsafeCoerce > > and dozens of others, all of which are expressed as specialized types > with the same equation: > let x = x in x _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
