[repeat post] Re: Syntax for implicit parameters

[Keith Wansbrough]

[sorry for duplication; I missed out hugs-bugs before]

> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> > [...]
> > 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)?

Please correct me if I'm wrong:

The two syntaxes are:

 (i)  let ?x = foo in bar
 (ii) bar with ?x = foo

Surely we could use *zero* extra identifiers by writing:

  (ia)  let ?x = foo in bar
  (iia) bar where ?x = foo

i.e., s/dlet/let/ and s/with/where/ .

I thought this was mentioned at the Haskell Implementors' Meeting.

--KW 8-)

-- 
Keith Wansbrough <kw217@cl.cam.ac.uk>
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/kw217/
Cambridge University Computer Laboratory.