On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 11:48:17AM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote: > 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.
Yeah, that has confused several people already. I wish I used the new syntax in my original post, it really makes more sense. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell