Iavor Diatchki wrote:
Notice, furthermore, that the behavior of such constructors may be a
bit unexpected when combined with overloading. Consider, for example,
the following declarations:
data T = T !(forall a. Eq a = a)
test = seq (T undefined) True
In GHC 6.6 ``test`` evaluets to
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 19:47 -0700, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
All of this leads me to think that perhaps we should not allow
strictness annotations on polymorphic fields. Would people find this
too restrictive?
Yes.
Our current implementation of stream fusion relies on this:
data Stream a =
Hello,
At present, the Haskell report specifies the semantics of strict
datatype fields (the ones marked with !) in terms of the strict
application operator $! [Section 4.2.1, paragraph Strictness flags].
However, if we were to add polymorphic fields to Haskell, then we
cannot use this
