John Hughes wrote:
> What we need is different binding syntax for monomorphic and polymorphic
> bindings. Roll on := and = ...
If I recall correctly, in some earlier language (KRC?)
this difference was achieved by letting let-bindings be
polymorphic, and where-bindings be monomorphic.
The idea was that where-bindings ONLY encode sharing,
i.e., making the term graph structure explicit.
I actually like that distinction....
Wolfram
Not KRC: it had neither let nor where bindings! Each equation could be max one
line. In any case, I think this would be unfortunate: given that Haskell
permits large expressions, it would be awkward not to be able to make a
monomorphic binding except at the equation level.
john
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
