In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Derek Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think this type is an arrow. For a "product arrow", i.e. an > > instance of Hughes' "Arrow" class with "first" defined, you can define > > this: > > Oh, it's definitely an arrow. I don't think you can make it an instance of Hughes' Arrow without some function for combining Strings. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
