[Haskell-cafe] Re: Non-Overlapping Patterns

PR Stanley wrote:

after the more specific cases?To put it another way, why doesn't the interpreter identify the more specific cases and put them before the general ones.

Given the function foo below, which of the first lines is more specific? No reordering means, that it is obvious that (foo 0 1) results in one. foo :: Int -> Int -> Bool foo x 1 = 1 foo 0 y = 0 foo x y = 2 Regards, Michael Karcher