Hello haskell,
we can consider functions as value-to-value mappings,
'type' definitions as type-to-type mappings,
'data' and 'class' as type-to-value mappings
but their syntax are different. functions has the most convenient syntax:
f patterns_for_parameters | guards = result
we can improve readability of various declarations by using the same
scheme:
class Monad m | Functor m, Monoid m where ...
instance Monad (WriterT m) | Monad m where ...
data EncodedStream m h | Monad m, Stream m h = ...
sequence :: [m a] -> m [a] | Monad m
By moving "guards" to the right side we will get more readable
definitions where most important information (type/class name and
shape of parameters) are written first and less important after
Even more unification can be applied to GADT-style definitions and
definitions of type/data families. The following is a well-known GADT
example rewritten in "functional" style:
data Expr t = If (Expr Bool) (Expr t) (Expr t)
Expr Int = Lit Int
Expr Bool | Eq t = Eq (Expr t) (Expr t)
And next is the example of type function which selects optimal array
representation depending on type of its elements:
type Arr Bool = BitVector
Arr u | Unboxed u = UArray u
Arr (a,b) = (Arr a, Arr b)
Arr a = Array a
where Unboxed is a class whose instances are unboxable types.
We can also allow to use as guards partial type functions, i.e.
functions that defined only for subset of type parameters:
type SeqElem [a] = a
SeqElem (Sequence a) = a
SeqElem (Array a) = a
data Collection c | SeqElem c = Coll c
In general, any type-level computation can use:
* in patterns - any type constructors declared in 'data' statements
and their saturated synonyms
* in guards - classes (and partial type functions)
* at the right side - any type constructors and type functions
declared with data/type statements, including
associated types/type synonyms
Please note that ordinal functions dispatch (via pattern-matching) on
the data constructors which appear at the right side of 'data'
definitions while type-level computations dispatch (again via
pattern-matching) on type constructors which appears on left side of
the same 'data' definitions
ps: although this idea seems more appropriate for haskell' committee, i
propose to use it just now, starting from implementation of different
syntax for GADTs
--
Best regards,
Bulat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
