Am Dienstag, 21. März 2006 11:28 schrieb Bulat Ziganshin: > [...] > as i said, shebang patterns allow only to specify that IMPLEMENTATION > of some function is strict. this helps only when this function are > called directly. they can't help when function is passed as parameter > or enclosed in data structure or a part of class. the same about > datatypes - i can't declare what some algorithm works only with > strict lists. i try to find extensions what will allow to specify > strictness in every case where now we forced to use lazy computations > > the concrete syntax what i propose may be wrong
Well, it's probably nice sometimes to have types which guarantee the strictness of certain components. For example, it might be good to have a list type where the strictness of the elements is guaranteed. But I'm sure that it's wrong to try to achieve this by annotating type arguments like in [!a]. I think, this approach is wrong, not just the syntax. Best wishes, Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
