On Tuesday 16 Nov 2004 1:52 pm, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote: > George Russell wrote: > > Sorry, but I like implicit parameters, I use them, and I'm not going > > to stop using them because beta conversion no longer preserves > > semantics. > > You'll find that many people here don't agree with this view in general > (though there's been surprisingly little backlash against implicit > parameters in particular).
I would like to lash against them. I was unaware of the problems you describe, but their existence doesn't surprise me. In view of the controversy that a certain other perfectly safe, reasonable (and necessary) language extension proposal has generated recently the ready acceptance of this kind of brokeness is surprising. Frankly, the idea that anyone would want to jump through hoops to add them to a purely functional language sounds bizarre to me. Safe beta conversion really ought to be a sacred cow. Still, at least they're not enabled by default. With any luck we won't see too many people shooting themselves in the foot because they're too lazy to pass their parameters explicitly. :-) Regards -- Adrian Hey _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
