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?
>> 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.
--