Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:04:54 -0700, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> Choice (C) really says "the monomorphism restriction doesn't apply
> to implicit parameters". Which is fine, but remember that every
> innocent binding 'x = ...' that mentions an implicit parameter in
> the RHS becomes a *function* of that parameter, called at each
> use of 'x'. Now, the chances are that there are no intervening 'with'
> clauses that bind ?y, so a decent compiler should common up all
> those function calls. So I think I strongly favour (C). Indeed,
> one could make a similar argument for abolishing the monomorphism
> restriction altogether.
I agree!
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
\__/
^^ SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA
QRCZAK
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
