Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell

[Lars Lundgren]

On Tue, 16 May 2000, Jan Brosius wrote:

> Ok I understand this isomorphism better. However this remark seems to be of
> no value to functional programmers.
> Why trying to mix terms( otr types) with relations ?
> 

What is a 'type' in your oppinion?

Isn't a type a statement about pre- and post-conditions, i.e. a formula?

/Lars L