On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 17:23:26 +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandla)" wrote: > Luke Palmer wrote: > >Anyway, I think that once we start diving inside expressions to > >measure their specificity, we've gotten too complex to be predictable. > > Well, we don't have where clauses, but where closures! The former > should be a declarative sublanguge like regexps. They are evaluated > at compile time or type instanciation time or however it is called > and entered into the type constraint environment where the MMD looks > for it. For the latter a warning should be produced and they are *not* > considered for MMD other than applicability checking. They are of > course called for non-invocant params, in assignments etc.
Eek! no. I think guards (our where closures which I call where clauses) are enough... =) If you want to optimize simple where clauses by introspecting their PIL, that's a different story =) -- () Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418 perl hacker & /\ kung foo master: /me sneaks up from another MIME part: neeyah!!!!!
pgp1bev1lj7CN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
