Andres Loeh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The way I understand the proposal, there are no FooBar dictionaries
> ever. John said that this can be translated by a source-to-source
> translation, so internally, a FooBar dictionary *is* a Foo and a
> Bar dictionary.
Ah yes, I was misled by the syntax, which suggested a superclass
relationship, and therefore a combined dictionary. I see now the
improved syntax proposal which makes the absence much clearer.
Regards,
Malcolm
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
