Hi Mark,
at the end of section 2 of http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~mpj/fds.html you
might want to mention that there is a "standard" work-around whenever a
type constructor is needed but not available: Introduce a newtype.
> import Bits
> class Collects e c where
>empty :: c e
>insert :: e ->
Hi Mark,
thanks a lot for the private lesson. I have downloaded various papers
and started to read them. I'm just done with the Wadler/Blott paper.
I already suspected that I was partly reinventing the wheel with my
translation of type classes. It turned out that my approach is exactly
the same
Hello!
On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 04:51:35PM +0200, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
> [...]
> Repeated definitions can be writen as:
> f x = "hello"
> -- A long comment
> f x = "bye"
> And the system could report a warning (not an error).
In this case yes (a pattern can't ever be matched).
B
>I don't want to give the impression that I think the advocates of
>polytypism or arrows (...etc...) have done a poor job of describing
>them. Far from it -- there are lots of papers about polytypism for
>example, and it is fine work. But as a not-very-bright implementor
>I'm just not going to g
Hi Heribert,
Thanks for your feedback!
| at the end of section 2 of http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~mpj/fds.html you
| might want to mention that there is a "standard" work-around whenever a
| type constructor is needed but not available: Introduce a newtype.
Yes, an in fact this idea is mentioned at t
