> I've had an idea stewing in my head to do with per-type function > namespaces, that the current module namespace discussion reminded me > about. The problem is that there is a limited namespace for functions, > so that if you define a new data type, it is unwise to call functions > which work on that data type a very generic name such as 'add'. [..] > The idea that I've been throwing around is to be able to define a > separate namespace for each type; a function can either belong in a > "global" (default) namespace, or belong in a particular type's > namespace.
This feature would seem to be in competition with type classes; could you elaborate on the relative advantages and disadvantages? The type class story has the advantage of being well understood and quite effective, but there are certainly some limitations too. --KW 8-) _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
