25 Apr 2001 07:18:50 GMT, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze: > Why would it magically turn into an ordinary identifier for inner > scopes? It dynamically appears in each place it is used. In other words since ?x is legal in an inner scope no matter whether it appears in an outer scope or not, it's meaning in the inner scope should not depend on that fact. -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/ \__/ ^^ SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA QRCZAK _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
- Implict parameters and monomorphism Simon Peyton-Jones
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism kahl
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Dylan Thurston
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Robert Ennals
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Robert Ennals
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Jeffrey R. Lewis
- RE: Implict parameters and monomorphism Simon Peyton-Jones
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism John Hughes
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Erik Meijer
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Rishiyur S. Nikhil
- Re: Implict parameters and monomorphism Andreas Rossberg