On 2007-09-12, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ok: >> I've been told that functional dependencies are old hat and there is >> now something better. I suspect that "better" here means "worse". > > Better here means "better" -- a functional language on the type system, > to type a functional language on the value level.
Meh. I prefer functional languages for general problems, but as type-checking is a rather specific problem, I don't see why logic programming isn't more appropriate. -- Aaron Denney -><- _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
