Hi all,
I'd like to make a few comments on the proposal for simple records in
Haskell 1.3.
* The possibility of having polymorphic field types has been left out
of the proposal. Polymorphic field types essentially bring second
order polymorphism into the language, by allowing function arg
On Wed, 13 Sep 1995 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, I'm glad to see I provoked some discussion!
...
> Why should foo evaluate its argument? It sounds to me like
> Lennart is right, and I should not have let Simon lead me astray!
...
> This is assuming I have understood Lennart correctly, and
Well, I'm glad to see I provoked some discussion!
Simon writes:
Lennart writes:
| So if we had
|
|data Age = Age !Int
|foo (Age n) = (n, Age (n+1))
|
| it would translate to
|
|foo (MakeAge n) = (n, seq MakeAge (n+1))
|
| [makeAge is the "rea
Lennart writes:
| So if we had
|
| data Age = Age !Int
| foo (Age n) = (n, Age (n+1))
|
| it would translate to
|
| foo (MakeAge n) = (n, seq MakeAge (n+1))
|
| [makeAge is the "real" constructor of Age]
|
| Now, surely, seq does not evaluate its first argument when the
|
