HIIt's one of those things - I know sort of instinctively why it is so but can't think of the formal rationale for it:
f g x = g (g x) :: (t -> t) -> (t -> t) Why not (t -> t) -> t -> (t -> t) to take account of the argument x for g? Cheers Paul
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
