On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:00 AM, zaxis<z_a...@163.com> wrote:
>
> seems a bit understanding, i still need to think it  for a while
> thanks!

I think I've understood the existential types thing, but I still can't
put them to work when I think to a solution for a particular problem,
i.e. it's not among my programming tools yet.

Thank you Eugene, that was one of the most enlighting examples I say
about existential types.

Cristiano
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to