Er? Without laziness, you're going to try to evaluate the bottoms
regardless of where they are. Or are you asserting that the
short-circuiting done by many strict languages is their standard evaluation
model?
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 7:32 PM Stefan Monnier
I don't know the historical answer, but I think it's because the true fixity can't be expressed in Haskell. No, the historical answer is that with lazy evaluation the shortcutting happens in the expected order. We did think about that.
I don't understand how laziness enters the picture:
(False && ⊥) && ⊥ ≡ False False && (⊥ && ⊥) ≡ False
in both cases we get the same result.
Stefan
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
-- brandon s allbery kf8nh allbery.b@gmail.com