--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Do you have an example of use of seq on a function type? (Of course I > don't want to ban it, just change its behaviour.)
I don't have any wisdom to offer on how we would want to ban or change the behavior of seq on a function type without using type classes. Nor do I have an example at hand where one absolutely needs to use seq on a function type. But in any case, your request seems to be beside the point, as it comes from the assumption that only seq on function types is dangerous. But that is not true. Polymorphic use of seq can also have dire consequences when the type in question is later instantiated with, say, Int (or whatever). See numerous examples in: http://wwwtcs.inf.tu-dresden.de/~voigt/seqFinal.pdf Ciao, Janis Voigtlaender. _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
