On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 13:03, Roman Cheplyaka wrote: > * Sean Leather [2011-09-04 12:48:38+0200] > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 12:31, Roman Cheplyaka wrote: > > > > > I'm looking for an example of idiomatic usage of the fixpoint > library[1]. > > > > > > [1]: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/fixpoint-0.1.1 > > > > > > I'm not sure if this counts for idiomatic usage, but you can check out > > our approach to incrementalization. > > > > http://people.cs.uu.nl/andres/Incrementalization/ > > Yeah, it has more or less the same problems as my code above. > > You essentially defined your tree twice (Tree and F (Tree)). > For such a simple type it's fine, but if it was an AST with a few > dozens of constructors, such approach would be unacceptable. >
True. Technically, one doesn't need Expr or Tree, right? But if you prefer to define your datatype that way, that's usually where I turn to code generation, possibly using Template Haskell, Data.Derive, or something else. Sean
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
