[Haskell-cafe] function type def

PR Stanley prstanley at ntlworld.com
Tue Apr 1 15:21:37 EDT 2008

It's one of those things - I know sort of instinctively why it is so 
but can't think of the formal rationale for it:
f g x = g (g x) :: (t -> t) -> (t -> t)
Why not
(t -> t) -> t -> (t -> t)
to take account of the argument x for g?

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list