I only added 'with' because I did not want to steal *two* new keywords.
One is bad enough! I proposed using 'let' (not dlet), with the '?' to
distinguish dynamic from lexical bindings, but did not achieve
consensus.
Lack of consensus => the status quo stays.
My order of preference:
1. [happy]. Use 'let'
2. [consent]. Use 'dlet' or 'with'
3. [hate] Use both 'dlet' and 'with'
Would the Hugs folk be willing to adopt (2)?
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Alastair Reid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 18 April 2001 18:31
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Syntax for implicit parameters
|
|
|
| Some months ago, there was talk about making sure GHC and Hugs use the
| same syntax for implicit parameters and (most importantly) that that
| syntax should not introduce the keyword "with".
|
| As far as I can see (from looking at both parsers and trying
| examples), this discussion has not been acted on. Hugs seems to
| allow:
|
| dlet ?x = 'a' in ?x + 1
| ?x + 1 with ?x = 'a'
|
| and GHC 5.0 only seems to support:
|
| ?x + 1 with ?x = 'a'
|
| Can the GHC people, the Hugs people and the implicit parameter
| designers come to some sort of agreement and implement the result?
|
|
| --
| Alastair Reid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~reid/
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
_______________________________________________
Hugs-Bugs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-bugs
