On Saturday 01 July 2006 18:44, Taral wrote: > Does it have fall-through semantics?
The Clean Report[1] is not really clear on that but to my knowledge nested guards do not have fall-through semantics. The report does mention this: "To ensure that at least one of the alternatives of a nested guard will be successful, a nested guarded alternative must always have a 'default case' as last alternative." Bas van Dijk. [1] ftp://ftp.cs.kun.nl/pub/Clean/Clean20/doc/CleanRep2.0.pdf (See 3.3 Guards) _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org//mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime