Would the problematic semantics of seq be resolved if seq did nothing on
function types? That is to say
seq (\x -> undefined `asTypeOf` x) y reduced to y
and
seq (undefined `asTypeOf` id) y also reduced to y
--
Russell O'Connor <http://r6.ca/>
``All talk about `theft,''' the general counsel of the American Graphophone
Company wrote, ``is the merest claptrap, for there exists no property in
ideas musical, literary or artistic, except as defined by statute.''
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
