On 28-Sep-1999, Andreas C. Doering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The trickier part is putting different types into a heterogenous
> > collection, and then manipulating according to their _individual_ types.
>
> If we are already at this point, a naive question:
>
> Assume we add the type of all types. Hence we can declare a
> function, say from type to string, we can manipulate types and
> so forth.
> This would us allow to deal with this situation.
> What is the danger, what would it break?
The Hugs/ghc library already includes that.
See the "Type" type and the "Typeable" typeclass,
sections 5.1 and 5.2 in the Hugs/ghc extensions library documentation.
It's sufficient for doing dynamic type casts, but it's
not sufficient for doing dynamic type class casts.
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
