Dnia czw 28. sierpnia 2003 16:37, Frank Atanassow napisał:
> SML has the same limitations w.r.t. guards as Haskell; Haskell
> compilers can and do check exhaustiveness, but not redundancy because
> matches are tried sequentially. I believe SML matching is also
> sequential. If there is a difference between the two, it must have to
> do with laziness.
SML doesn't have guards at all.
Most Haskell matches are correctly flagged as non-exhaustive or redundant
if you use "otherwise" instead of relying on some guards themselves being
exhaustive (which the compiler can't check).
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
