Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I think the spectators are right. We need to be clear about the distinction
between tags and identifiers, both in our syntax and in the way we talk and
write.
People used to ML or Haskell (or even to Agda) will expect constructors to be a
special kind of identifier, with scope and type. Our tags have no inherent
scope or type. I guess we need to explain the bidirectional deal.
We do need some way to distinguish the tags from the identifiers. The quote is
a bit ugly, but it fulfils that need, for the time being.
Original comment by co...@strictlypositive.org
on 8 Sep 2010 at 10:38
Fixed by "(I)Data: constructor definitions takes a quote mark (for uniformity)".
Original comment by pedag...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2010 at 11:09
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
pedag...@gmail.com
on 7 Sep 2010 at 9:35