AntC wrote
> I think you'll find rather a lot of those in existing code.
> So this is a code-breaking change.
Could you give an example of existing code that would break? This certainly
wasn't what I had in mind.
--
View this message in context:
>
> With syntaxless TDNR enabled, the last line could be:
>
> f b c = do { reset b; reset c }
>
Heck, I didn't think you meant something that radical.
So bare name in a function application context is to need disambiguating.
I think you'll find rather a lot of those in existing code.
So
