>>>>> On Fri, 18 Dec 92 15:42:42 GMT, kh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>>>> On Thu, 03 Dec 92 08:13:17 +0000, Simon L Peyton Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
> Simon> Why do you need to drop the (..) when it turns into a "data" decl?
> Simon> You only need do so if you want it to be abstract!
> Simon> But "type" decls can't be abstract; the (..) reminds you of this.
>
> I don't want reminding. I know it isn't abstract, but for the sake of
> the importing module I like to pretend it is.
kh> In that case, perhaps you should always use data declarations (with a
kh> dummy constructor) rather than type synonyms. Some compilers will give
kh> you better error messages this way, and a good compiler might eliminate
kh> the extra constructor anyway (depending on how good a strictness
kh> analyser it has!).
Are there any "good" compilers available? i.e. will any of the
currently available compilers do the above optimisation?
bevan
