On 8/3/07, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is it not possible that is desugars to
> > do case x of
> > [] -> return 1
> > (y:ys) -> g y >>= \temp -> f temp
> See the rule about always binding to the previous line of a do block.
> This case then violates that.
I assumed that the example was equivalent to :
do case x of
[] -> return 1
(y:ys) -> do f (<- g y)
Shouldn't the rule work then ?
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
