I agree with everything Paul says, about translations, and about
Norman's point.
I'll record them in my things-to-improve-in-the-next-iteration-of
the-Report file...
Incidentally, I also do not like n+k patterns, but they don't
seem to be a big issue to me, either from a semantic or implementation
point of view.
Simon
| We discussed various solutions
| and opted for the simplest (if not most formal): whenever a
| name freshly appears on the right side of a translation, add
| a comment that says where it came from. If you look at the
| translations for expressions in Section 3 of the Report, you
| will see many instances of the phrase "as defined in the Standard
| Prelude". It was an oversight not to include such a phrase in
| the translation of patterns given in Section 3.14, the source of
| Lennart's original question.
| I think that Norman's suggested rewording is correct, but I suggest
| that it be further modifed to read:
|
| "n+k pattern bindings are explicitly disallowed; programs such as
| x+2=3 are parsed as a definition of +."
