Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 03.12.2009, 13:03 -0500 schrieb David Menendez: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Joachim Breitner > <m...@joachim-breitner.de> wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 03.12.2009, 11:13 +0000 schrieb Matthew Pocock: > >> Perhaps what you are looking for is a more powerful "defining" > >> semantics? > >> > >> newtype MyFoo = Foo defining (Foo(..)) -- all class instances that Foo > >> has are delegated through from MyFoo > > > > it goes into the right direction, but I’d also like to have this also > > capeable to derive single functions (giving them a new name), and not > > only class instances. > > Something like the restricted type synonym extension in Hugs? > > <http://cvs.haskell.org/Hugs/pages/users_guide/restricted-synonyms.html>
yes, this is very close to what I’d hope for. Last minor (but really minor) wish: I don’t think it would hurt to allow the use of this feature independent of the definition of the newtype: I could have a newtype Foo = Foo Int somewhere, possibly in a different module, and write something like myFoo :: Foo -> (Foo,Foo) resolving Foo myFoo a = (a,a+a) (syntax and wording very ad hoc and not thought through). But yes, I think I’d be happy to have hugs’ extension here at hand sometimes. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner e-Mail: m...@joachim-breitner.de Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de ICQ#: 74513189 Jabber-ID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
