I agree. There are other ways that to solve the same problem as the case distinction does.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 7, 2007 12:45 PM, Johannes Waldmann <<a href="mailto:waldmann@imn.htwk-leipzig.de">waldmann@imn.htwk-leipzig.de
</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:<br>
<br> > The problem is that Haskell 98 already messed that up.<br></div> > If type functions are to use lower-case letters, [...]<br><br>Yes.<br><br>The broken thing is that the upper/lower case distinction<br>has syntactic importance in the language definition at all.
<br><br>I guess this was introduced to avoid writing out<br>some declarations. This is a bad design goal,<br>especially so for a declarative language.<br><br>Reminds me of ancient Fortran using the first letter of an identifier
<br>for implicit typing (I .. N for integer, others for real).<br><br>Best regards,<br><font color="#888888">--<br>-- Johannes Waldmann -- Tel/Fax (0341) 3076 6479/80 --<br>---- <a href="http://www.imn.htwk-leipzig.de/%7Ewaldmann/" target="_blank">
http://www.imn.htwk-leipzig.de/~waldmann/</a> -------<br></font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>_______________________________________________<br>Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org">
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org</a><br><a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users</a><br></div></div></blockquote>
</div><br>