Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #15869, comment 2


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Nov 7, 2018 4:27:32 PM (12 months ago)
Author:
goldfire
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #15869, comment 2

    initial v1  
    331. I would expect `Apply1` to be rejected without an explicit `forall` in the equation, giving the polytype of `f`.
    44
    5 2. The error message for `Apply2` shouldn't say that it expects for arguments to `f`. The rest of the error message is perhaps confusing, but it's not unreasonable.
     52. The error message for `Apply2` shouldn't say that it expects more arguments to `f`. The rest of the error message is perhaps confusing, but it's not unreasonable.
    66
    773. The version of `Apply2` with the explicit `forall` in the equation should be accepted.