itz> All this taken together, I mean, _really_, is the lexical itz> structure of Haskell a botch, or what? Jon> No. Innovative. All the problems described in this thread reflect Jon> unwarranted assumptions inherited in emacs. It's plainly possible Jon> to parse Haskell, and not hard either. First, parsing of a complete program (eg. by a compiler) is quite different from parsing a buffer that is being edited by a human. The latter is hard, even for fairly well-specified languages. Irregularities only make it harder. Second, this argument would be easier to accept if there in fact were an equally innovative tool capable of providing all the editing goodies Emacs normally does, for Haskell. But I don't know of one, even now, 10 years or so after Haskell's birth. -- Ian Zimmerman, Oakland, California, U.S.A. GPG: 433BA087 9C0F 194F 203A 63F7 B1B8 6E5A 8CA3 27DB 433B A087 The world has taken on a thickness of vulgarity that raises a spiritual man's contempt to the violence of a passion. Baudelaire