Recently, I wrote a function similar to
x :: a
x = x 42
which is type-correct (Hugs, Ghc, THIH).
Still, from the expression it is clear
that the type shoud have a function type.
The definition
x :: a - b
x = x 42
is equally well accepted, though I can't
see why this type would
Rijk J. C. van Haaften [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Recently, I wrote a function similar to
x :: a
x = x 42
which is type-correct (Hugs, Ghc, THIH).
Still, from the expression it is clear
that the type shoud have a function type.
The definition
x :: a - b
x = x 42
is equally well
mån 2002-03-04 klockan 15.11 skrev Rijk J. C. van Haaften:
Hello,
Recently, I wrote a function similar to
x :: a
x = x 42
which is type-correct (Hugs, Ghc, THIH).
Still, from the expression it is clear
that the type shoud have a function type.
It might interest you to know that this
