[plt-scheme] Re: Typed Scheme: Is there any easy way around this?

Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ...> writes:

> 
> We have chosen the traditional notation intentionally. Your proposal  
> doesn't reduce the number of parentheses nor the number of chars I  
> have to type, right?
> 
> And before we get more email on this: keep in mind that I have worked  
> with two people who did Hindley-Milner inference for types in Scheme,  
> with two people who did SBA inference for Scheme, and now it's  
> explicitly, statically typed. Period. Until further notice.
> 
>   -- Matthias
> 

Was there a prior discussion about this online (I can't seem to find one.)? 
What about the type system makes it hard to support inference?

Matt