> On Oct 26, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> ORDER of the abstracted constructors matters!
That's a very good point. So we don't have a set of sets -- we have a set of
lists (where normal constructors -- which have no overlap -- would appear in
the lists in every possible permutation).
Again, please don't take my set of lists too seriously from an implementation
point of view. We clearly wouldn't implement it this way. But I want to use
this abstraction to understand the shape of the problem and what an idealized
solution might look like before worrying about implementation and syntax.
Richard
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
