Vag Vagoff wrote:
On 13.04.2011 4:13, Adam Chlipala wrote:
This behavior is just as in ML or Haskell. You are shadowing a
definition, but the old definition doesn't "go away," it just becomes
impossible to reference. At the end of the file, [y] has a type that
refers to an out-of-scope identifier, but that isn't problematic
semantically.
No, in Haskell you can shadow only by local (let or where)
definitions, not top level.
There is,
- toplevel definition in current module clashes with any imported
definitions (there is why "hiding" is used)
- toplevel definition in current module clashes with other toplevel
definitions in current module
Ah, thanks for the correction. I should stop making claims about
Haskell without doing some programming in it first. ;)
_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
