In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Right, you can get good genericity with Haskell's typeclasses (I've >posted about that often in the past, and desperately and so far >unsuccessfully tried to convince Guido to use something close to >typeclasses rather than "interfaces" for such purposes as PEP 246 >[protocol adaptation]); it's the state of _templates_ in Haskell, >specifically, which I was rather dubious about (it may be that I just >haven't dug into them deep enough yet, but they do seem not a little >"convoluted" to me, so far).
Hrm. I don't recall anything about typeclasses, so my suspicion is that you were writing something lengthy and above my head. Can you write something reasonably short about it? (I'm asking partly for your benefit, because if it makes sense to me, that will likely go a long way toward making sense to Guido -- we seem to think similarly in certain ways.) -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Don't listen to schmucks on USENET when making legal decisions. Hire yourself a competent schmuck." --USENET schmuck (aka Robert Kern) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
