John Hughes wrote: > What we need is different binding syntax for monomorphic and polymorphic > bindings. Roll on := and = ... If I recall correctly, in some earlier language (KRC?) this difference was achieved by letting let-bindings be polymorphic, and where-bindings be monomorphic. The idea was that where-bindings ONLY encode sharing, i.e., making the term graph structure explicit. I actually like that distinction.... Wolfram Not KRC: it had neither let nor where bindings! Each equation could be max one line. In any case, I think this would be unfortunate: given that Haskell permits large expressions, it would be awkward not to be able to make a monomorphic binding except at the equation level. john