> * When you evaluate an expression in the interpreter, it has to use some > symbol table for looking up the ids you use. What symbol table does it use? > The only credible alternatives are: > > * The export list of the "current module" (see :module command) > * The symbol table of the "current module" > > Hugs uses the latter (which seems more useful) but you might reasonably > expect Hugs to use the export list and wonder why Hugs doesn't seem to > implement abstract data types correctly when you do experiments from the > command line.
This begs the question of exactly what it means to "load modules". The Hugs documentation AFAIK seems to assume it's self-evident. But, as the "not a bug it's a feature" message above makes clear, it isn't, even when just a single module is loaded. I would have thought module loading could be defined in terms of something *in* Haskell (as did presumably the bug reporters the message is responding to); but at the moment the best that could be said is that module loading is an undocumented hack. Bob T. _______________________________________________ Hugs-Bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-bugs
