Syntax for implicit parameters

[Jeffrey R. Lewis]

"Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" wrote:

> "Jeffrey R. Lewis" <jeff@galconn.com> wrote,
>
> > > Lack of consensus => the status quo stays.
> > >
> > > My order of preference:
> > >
> > > 1. [happy]. Use 'let'
> > > 2. [consent].  Use 'dlet' or 'with'
> > > 3. [hate]  Use both 'dlet' and 'with'
> > >
> > > Would the Hugs folk be willing to adopt (2)?
> >
> > That would certainly be fine by me.
>
> What exactly does (2) imply?  Does it mean we get `with'
> back or not?

I'm afraid I misspoke.  I meant (2) with `with'.  Sorry ;-)  I'm happy to nuke `dlet'.

--Jeff