The dreaded M-R

[Malcolm Wallace]

"Simon Marlow" <simonmar at microsoft.com> writes:

> On 26 January 2006 09:59, John Hughes wrote:
> > The solution I favour is simply to use *different syntax* for the two
> > forms of binding,
> 
> I wonder if there's an alternative solution along these lines:
>   - We use ParialTypeSignatures to make bindings monomorphic:
>     eg.
> 
>       x :: _
>       x = (+1)

I agree with Simon that two forms of binding feels like a heavyweight
solution.  Variable-binding is just such a fundamental thing, that
introducing a second form would need exceptional justification IMO.
However partial type signatures seem like a very nice alternative.
Just as currently, the decision on monomorphising a binding is based
on the type signature (its presence, absence, or form).

Regards,
    Malcolm