On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Brandon Allbery <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Michael Sloan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> What if instead we re-framed this as a "top-level where clause", like >> this: >> >> main :: IO () >> main = putStrLn ("Hi" <> "There") >> >> other-function :: IO () >> other-function = putStrLn ("I can " <> "also use it") >> >> -- NOTE: 0 indent! >> >> where >> (<>) :: String -> String -> String >> (<>) = (++) > > > This would actually be slightly odd parse-wise, as we're already *in* an > unindented where clause (module ... where)
Ahh, of course! Good point, that makes this idea rather unappealing - it is indeed inconsistent. Just throwing ideas out there! > -- > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates > [email protected] [email protected] > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
