Thank you Martin.
Coherence (roughly) means that the program's semantics is independent
of the program's typing.
In case of your example below, I could type the program
either use the first or the second instance (assuming
g has type Int->Int). That's clearly bound.
If g has type Int->Int, it is not hard to say the first instance should
apply.
But how about g having a polymorphic type? In this case it seems to me
choosing the second instance is an acceptable choice as that is the only
applicable one at the moment. What is the definition of a "coherent"
behaviour here? Or is there one?
Non-overlapping instances are necessary but not sufficient to
obtain coherence. We also need that types/programs are unambiguous.
Do you therefore imply that coherence is not defined without the
non-overlapping assumption?
--william
_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN Hotmail alerts on your mobile.
http://mobile.msn.com/ac.aspx?cid=uuhp_hotmail
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
