[Haskell] semantice of seq

[roconnor at theorem.ca]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Duncan Coutts wrote:

> Ah ok, I misunderstood. Well that'd be a bit odd too. No other function
> behaves differently on different types except by use of type classes.

I agree it is quite odd, but the seq we have is already quite odd.

> Furthermore, the fact is that seq on function types is actually useful
> for controlling space and time behaviour, so it's not clear that we want
> to ban it.

Do you have an example of use of seq on a function type?  (Of course I 
don't want to ban it, just change its behaviour.)

-- 
Russell O'Connor                                      <http://r6.ca/>
``All talk about `theft,''' the general counsel of the American Graphophone
Company wrote, ``is the merest claptrap, for there exists no property in
ideas musical, literary or artistic, except as defined by statute.''