Good point. I stand corrected.
-Brent
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:42:23AM -0300, Felipe Almeida Lessa wrote:
> Brent, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but I don't
> think that the order of the arguments is playing any role here besides
> defining the order in which the pattern match
Brent, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but I don't
think that the order of the arguments is playing any role here besides
defining the order in which the pattern matches are desugared.
To illustrate,
-- This does work
foo1' :: a -> Foo a -> Int
foo1' m Foo = case m of
At Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:59:00 -0400,
Brent Yorgey wrote:
> Yes, I was going to suggest switching the argument order before
> reading your message. This is an interesting way in which you can
> observe that Haskell does not really have "multi-argument functions".
> All multi-argument functions are r
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:11:16AM +0100, Francesco Mazzoli wrote:
> At Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:03:27 + (UTC),
> AntC wrote:
> > Hi Francesco, I think you'll find that the 'annoyance' is nothing to do
> > with GADTs. I suggest you take the type signature off of foo1, and see
> > what type ghc inf
At Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:03:27 + (UTC),
AntC wrote:
> Hi Francesco, I think you'll find that the 'annoyance' is nothing to do
> with GADTs. I suggest you take the type signature off of foo1, and see
> what type ghc infers for it. It isn't :: a -> Foo a -> Int.
>
> [...]
>
> Yep, that message e
Francesco Mazzoli mazzo.li> writes:
>
> I have stumbled upon a strange annoyance:
>
> {-# LANGUAGE GADTs #-}
Hi Francesco, I think you'll find that the 'annoyance' is nothing to do
with GADTs. I suggest you take the type signature off of foo1, and see
what type ghc infers for it. It isn'
