Jon Fairbairn wrote:
>
> I wasn't fit enough to follow the earlier discussions of the
> layout rule, so I'm not sure how this interacts with
> previous awkward cases. I'd be happiest if we could come up
> with a rule that didn't involve sticking in braces and
> semicolons because it won't parse otherwise. Can someone
> remind me why the "A close brace is also inserted whenever
> the syntactic category containing the layout list ends" part
> of the rule is there?
It's so you can write
let x = 2+2 in x*x
(and similar things)
I think this inserting a '}' when there would otherwise have been
a syntax error is a terrible mistake. It makes it almost impossible
to implement correctly, and to understand. But it's with us now in H98.
-- Lennart
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
