Commit 5e5018b6 authored by Ian Lynagh's avatar Ian Lynagh
Browse files

Update the user guide so it talks about the newer "do rec" notation everywhere

Some of the problems highlighted in trac #3968.
parent 151491ff
......@@ -910,9 +910,15 @@
<entry>Enable <link linkend="recursive-do-notation">recursive do notation</link>.</entry>
<entry>Enable <link linkend="mdo-notation">recursive do (mdo) notation</link>.</entry>
<entry>Enable <link linkend="mdo-notation">recursive do (mdo) notation</link>. This is deprecated; please use <link linkend="recursive-do-notation">recursive do notation</link> instead.</entry>
......@@ -911,7 +911,7 @@ it, you can use the <option>-XNoNPlusKPatterns</option> flag.
<!-- ===================== Recursive do-notation =================== -->
<sect2 id="mdo-notation">
<sect2 id="recursive-do-notation">
<title>The recursive do-notation
......@@ -1047,7 +1047,7 @@ It supports rebindable syntax (see <xref linkend="rebindable-syntax"/>).
<sect3> <title> Mdo-notation (deprecated) </title>
<sect3 id="mdo-notation"> <title> Mdo-notation (deprecated) </title>
<para> GHC used to support the flag <option>-XRecursiveDo</option>,
which enabled the keyword <literal>mdo</literal>, precisely as described in
......@@ -1697,7 +1697,7 @@ and the fixity declaration applies wherever the binding is in scope.
For example, in a <literal>let</literal>, it applies in the right-hand
sides of other <literal>let</literal>-bindings and the body of the
<literal>let</literal>C. Or, in recursive <literal>do</literal>
expressions (<xref linkend="mdo-notation"/>), the local fixity
expressions (<xref linkend="recursive-do-notation"/>), the local fixity
declarations of a <literal>let</literal> statement scope over other
statements in the group, just as the bound name does.
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment