Quoting Andrew Pimlott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 11:06:29PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Andrew Pimlott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In the present case, people aren't (only) opposing the M-R out of
>principle, but because they actually use overloaded variable definitions
>and (at least sometimes) want to leave off the signature. So I don't
>see how one could claim, as on the wiki, the warning "wouldn't happen
>much". I suspect it would happen, and annoy people, and defeat the
>reason that people want to remove the M-R.
So I envisage that you'd turn off the warning in the same way as
you turn off the M-R today: by a type signature.
But if people were happy adding type signatures for every polymorphic
variable definition, they wouldn't be moving to eliminate the M-R, would
they? Or do I misunderstand?
Well, my feeling is that the M-R is an ugly wart, and I want it gone.
But I'm still happy to put a type signature when I want something to
be polymorphic.
-- Lennart
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
[email protected]
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
