On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Keean Schupke <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 May 2015 17:07, "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Keean Schupke <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> To clarify I am suggesting a single, multi equals let as the way it >>> should be done, not necessarily the way other people do it. >> >> >> Clear, but not what we are going to do. > > Then I would vote for no lets at the top level at all. > >>> >>> In a pure functional language like Haskell you would need to be in the IO >>> monad to write a REPL loop. >> >> >> BitC is not a pure functional language, and is not intended to be. That's >> one of its strengths. > > The language can be the same, just the types of some terms are different.
You mean with effect monads? We still have a "Monads Debate" in the wings. :) _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
