> Do you know why they switched over in GHC 6.6?
If I were to speculate, I'd say it is related to GADTs. Before GADTs,
we can keep conflating quantified type variables with schematic type
variables. GADTs seem to force us to make the distinction.
Consider this code:
data G a where
GI :: Int
Thanks, I think I understand it now.
Do you know why they switched over in GHC 6.6?
-Kangyuan Niu
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:11 AM, wrote:
>
> Kangyuan Niu wrote:
> > Aren't both Haskell and SML translatable into System F, from which
> > type-lambda is directly taken?
>
> The fact that both Hask
Kangyuan Niu wrote:
> Aren't both Haskell and SML translatable into System F, from which
> type-lambda is directly taken?
The fact that both Haskell and SML are translatable to System F does
not imply that Haskell and SML are just as expressive as System
F. Although SML (and now OCaml) does have
The paper "Lexically scoped type variables" by Simon Peyton Jones and Mark
Shields describes two ways to give type variables lexical scoping. They
state that one of the advantages of the GHC-style type-sharing approach
over the SML-style type-lambda approach is that the former allows for
existentia
