Martin Sulzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yoann Padioleau writes: > > nevertheless i found constructor class more elegant for many problems. > > Your solution is less elegant that the one using constructor classes. > > > > Yes, the current presentation of constructor classes might be easier > to comprehend. > > > I found too that type error messages of class using functionnal depedencies > > are not easy to read. There is often ambiguity in code that are not easy to >solver. > > this problem does not appear with constructor classes. > > > > Well, that's the point of my encoding of functors using FD's. No > ambiguities will arise! > > The issue I want to raise is whether constructor classes are redundant > in the presence of FDs (yes, yes, we still might want to stick to the > constructor class representation, but that's a different issue).
Oh, sorry, i misinterpret what you wanted to say. > > Martin > > > -- Yoann Padioleau, INSA de Rennes, France, Opinions expressed here are only mine. Je n'écris qu'à titre personnel. **____ Get Free. Be Smart. Simply use Linux and Free Software. ____** _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell