Achim Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's not specified though, the runtime could choose to let + force > the two chunks the different way round. > And that is probably also the reason why [1..] == [1..] is _|_.
Is "Something that can be, in any evaluation strategy, be bottom, is bottom" quite right, i.e. the formalism defined such, that no possibly unevaluable thing is defined? -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for past copyright information. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying, hiring, renting, public performance and/or broadcasting of this signature prohibited. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
