-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12/15/10 02:36 , Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
> Regarding the rationale, I'm not so sure and I'd like to hear an
> explanation from someone competent. But I assume it has something
> to do with the fact that if you supply a 'do' argument, you cannot
> supply any more arguments (because 'do' extends to the right as far as
> possible). Not that I'm convinced that it is a valid reason to prohibit
> such construct.
Hm? do {...} would work, as would using indentation per usual layout rules
(the next argument would be indented no farther than the "do"). It'd
certainly be more confusing to read, though.
- --
brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] [email protected]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [email protected]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk0SsvUACgkQIn7hlCsL25XM6wCcDvu9G3fc9M5Vv6d2EKZ64X8t
k7YAn0hvoyq0KpmAAEyAD4HIWX8HsMTY
=11UF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
