this might be getting ot and silly but i seem to be under the impression that the rule of thumb with haskell and ocaml and such is:
* at first you don't manually annotate and things are ok because the type inference does it for you. * then after 500 lines of code something fails to type check. the error is weird and pretty much utterly inscrutable, doesn't really match the location it is complaining about. * then you either figure out somehow what happened, or you start to annotate with what *you* think things should be, and eventually you go back far enough to find where the inference went off into la la land, but silently succeeded, until later when it hit some la la contradiction. * so from then on you know you should just annotate manually as you go along. * what i figured one must want is for the inference to put the annotations in as it decides them so that i can see them right away and manually change them if need be. i guess. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
