+* Can a scoped type variable denote a type scheme?
+
+* Relation between separate type sigs and pattern type sigs
+f :: forall a. a->a
+f :: b->b = e -- No: monomorphic
+
+f :: forall a. a->a
+f :: forall a. a->a -- OK
+
+f :: forall a. [a] -> [a]
+f :: forall b. b->b = e ???
+
+
+-------------------------------
NB: all floats are let-binds, but some non-rec lets
may be unlifted (with RHS ok-for-speculation)