I was wondering if this would make sense
allow extensential type synonyms, so if you had something like the
following,
> data Type a =
you could declare a synonym such as
> type AnyType = exists a . Type a
so you can create functions such as
> areSame :: AnyType -> AnyType -> Bool
whic
[cc'ing to the Haskell mailing list]
S. Alexander Jacobson schrieb:
> A while back, I had been arguing on the Haskell mailing list that module
> meanings were not and should not be qualified by package names.
It cannot be argued that introducing a package system does nothing in
terms of disambigu
On 12/12/05, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This looks like a mistake in the syntax. I think GHC is following the
> letter of the spec, but I also think that the intended behaviour was to
> admit --: as a varsym, i.e. Hugs' behaviour.
I agree. I suggest modifying the "comment" producti
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 11:14:46PM +, Paul Johnson wrote:
> From the README:
>
>Ranged sets allow programming with sets of values that are described
> by a
>list of ranges. A value is a member of the set if it lies within one of
>the ranges. The ranges in a set are ordered and n
On 09 December 2005 05:47, Taral wrote:
> On 12/8/05, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> or b) comment, because the maximal munch rule says so (it matches
>> the newline):
>>
>> comment -> dashes [any {any}] newline
>> varsym -> (symbol {symbol | :})
>
> Aha. Maximal munch only applies to non-
From the README:
Ranged sets allow programming with sets of values that are described
by a
list of ranges. A value is a member of the set if it lies within one of
the ranges. The ranges in a set are ordered and non-overlapping, so the
standard set operations can be implemented by
