Andrew J Bromage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I, for one, am sorting expected, not worst-case, data :-)
>> What's this obsession with worst-case behaviour anyway?
> The best algorithm to use is the one which exploits known facts about
> the data. The converse is: The worst algorithm to use is
¶Ç¯u¸¹½X¥X°â
§Ú¦³¥_°Ï02_¶}ÀY¶Ç¯u¸¹½X¡A¦@¬°77270µ§
¬O§Ú±q¦UÓ¦P·~¤½·|¡B¹q¸Üï¡B¶À¶¡B¼x«H©Ò¡B
ºô»Úºô¸ô¡A¥úºÐ¤ù...µ¥µ¥¡A
¸g¦~²Ö¤ë¤@µ§¤@µ§¥´¤J¦¬¶°¤U¨Óªº¡A¶O¤F«Ü¤jªº¥\¤Ò¡C
¥úªá¿ú¶R¼x«H©Ò¥Xªºªº¥U¤l¡A´Nªá¤F¤£¤Ö¿ú¡A
¦A¸g¹L²Îp¤èªk¾ã²z¡A©Ò¥H¨S¦³¥ô¦ó¤@µ§¬O«½Æªº¡A
¨Ã¸g¹L¹ê»Úµo°e´ú¸Õ¡A¦Aç°£±¼µL®Äª
I'll take a stab at this:
> data Foo2 = forall a. MkFoo2 { val2 :: a
>, func2 :: a -> Bool
>}
>
> But the compiler said:
>
> Can't combine named fields with locally-quantified type variables
> In the declaration of data constructor
Hello,
I have a question regarding named fields and existential data types.
I want to extend this example from the User's guide to use named fields:
data Foo = forall a. MkFoo a (a->Bool)
| Nil
foo = MkFoo 'g' isUpper
I tried:
data Foo2 = forall a. MkFoo2 { val2 :: a
