patches/diffs for full :browse! (fixes most of #1617)
simonpj at microsoft.com
Fri Sep 14 05:04:36 EDT 2007
| however, you don't actually seem to do any lifting to merge
| the two foralls in front, and still claim that
| c :: forall a b. (C a b) => forall a1. a1 -> b
| is a valid type - ghc disagrees!-) nesting foralls is ok, but
| nesting a forall in a context does not seem to be accepted.
| do you intend to change that (either the acceptance, or the
| output), or should i send my updated patches now?
I don't understand the issue here. That really *is* the type of c. What do you mean that ghc "disagrees"?
More information about the Cvs-ghc