On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 06:22:46AM -0800, Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza wrote:
The only programs it would break are those that specify it at the end (they'd require an extra "return ()", right?
I can imagine many other cases, but none of them very likely.
This brings me to wonder also if it'd be possible for the compilers to add a little bit more smarts to the "do" notation syntax, so that it'll add the return () at the end if it's missing. Maybe too much to ask of the Haskell crowd :).
I wouldn't like that, as do-expressions without return at the end can be convenient. They can also make your intent clearer for other programmers and perhaps also the compiler, especially when you want to write tail-recursive monadic code (assuming a suitable monad and/or a sufficiently smart compiler). Best regards Tomasz -- I am searching for programmers who are good at least in (Haskell || ML) && (Linux || FreeBSD || math) for work in Warsaw, Poland