Achim Schneider <barsoap@xxxxxx> wrote:
> That's not specified though, the runtime could choose to let + force
> the two chunks the different way round.
And that is probably also the reason why [1..] == [1..] is _|_.
Is "Something that can be, in any evaluation strategy, be bottom, is
bottom" quite right, i.e. the formalism defined such, that no
possibly unevaluable thing is defined?
(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for
past copyright information. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying,
hiring, renting, public performance and/or broadcasting of this
Haskell-Cafe mailing list