| >How about an even simpler solution: | > | > *All* pattern and variable bindings are monomorphic unless a type | > signature is given. | > | Now that IS an interesting idea. The more I think about it, the more I like it. I like it too. But be aware that a top-level definition reverse = foldr (\x ys -> ys ++ [x]) [] would get the inferred type [()] -> [()] because it'd be monomorphic, and completely un constrained type variables are defaulted to (), in GHC at least. Simon