On 18-Feb-2000, Brian Boutel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OK, I understand now. But what advantage does explicit control of instance
> import/export give you over the current Haskell rule?
It's just a question of information hiding.
It lets you declare a type to be an instance of a public ty
On Friday, February 18, 2000 1:46 AM, Fergus Henderson
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>
> Mercury allows private instances, but it does not allow shadowing.
> For any given class and type, there can only be one instance;
> that instance can be public, or private, but not both.
>
> If you allow s
On 17-Feb-2000, Brian Boutel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday, February 17, 2000 7:02 PM, Fergus Henderson
> > Well, I remain unconvinced. In Mercury, we give the user control
> > over whether instance declarations are exported or not, and it
> > works quite nicely, IMHO. I think the pr
Jan Kort writes:
> It seem that any record, no matter how trivial, can't be much
> longer than about 200 lines in Haskell. If a try to compile a
> 300 line record containing just:
> data X = X {
> f1 :: String,
> f2 :: String,
> f3 :: String,
> ...
> f300 :: St
> On 16-Feb-2000, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The easiest way is to declare mmap as a foreign function
> using foreign
> > import, then build a little wrapper around it.
> Unfortunately you won't be
> > able to turn the resulting memory into an array (even a
> ByteArray),
Fergus Henderson wrote:
> On 16-Feb-2000, Jeffrey R. Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To my mind, the biggest flaw with overlapping instances is the separate
> > compilation issue: to whit, if the `instance Eq (Maybe String)' was in
> > a different module, not imported by the module defining
On Thursday, February 17, 2000 7:02 PM, Fergus Henderson
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>>
> Well, I remain unconvinced. In Mercury, we give the user control
> over whether instance declarations are exported or not, and it
> works quite nicely, IMHO. I think the problems that you are referring
