From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk John Hughes writes:

...

By the way, you leave out a lot of type signatures too. Your Djinn module contains 29 declarations with type signatures--and 17 without. The 17 are local, but local declarations are precisely those where, without the M-R, a lack of sharing would be most likely to bite.

Local definitions are rarely used polymorphically. Perhaps without a type signature the definition should be polymorphic and recomputed if it's global, and monomorphic and shared if it's local. Probably this is normally what you want--but oh, how confusing it would be! I'd like to be able to give a simple answer to the question "Is this binding shared or not?", not an answer that begins with "Is there a type signature?", "What does the type signature look like?", and "Is it local or global?"! This would open for very confusing behaviour when refactoring code, to move bindings between top-level and a local scope. John