Unit unboxed tuples

[wren ng thornton]

On 12/23/11 8:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> More uniform!  If you the singleton-unboxed-tuple data constructor in source code, as a function, you'd write (\x ->  (# x #)).   In a pattern, or applied, you'd write (# x #).

Shouldn't (# T #) be identical to T?

I know that a putative (T) would be different from T because it would 
introduce an additional bottom, but I don't think that would apply to 
the unboxed case. Or is there something in the semantics of unboxed 
tuples that I'm missing?

-- 
Live well,
~wren