Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:44:56 -0700, Joe English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> > [1] I was told on linux-utf8 that I should use iconv, not ISO C
> > wchar_t functions, to be portable to systems where wchar_t is not
> > Unicode. I did not get an answer: which systems are these.
>
> According t
| does type-checking remain decidable (in general) for overlapping instances
| (:+o in hugs)?
Type checking in Hugs (with -98, at least) isn't decidable,
either with or without overlapping instances! But decidability
could be recovered by placing stronger syntactic requirements
on the form of c
Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> [1] I was told on linux-utf8 that I should use iconv, not ISO C
> wchar_t functions, to be portable to systems where wchar_t is not
> Unicode. I did not get an answer: which systems are these.
According to the ISO C standard, the meaning of wchar_t
is
Fri, 1 Sep 2000 00:07:22 -0700, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> but the whole point of the module was to finally distingwish between
> Bytes and Chars and provide a base mechanism which allows machine and
> compiler independant IO with haskell..
This is independent of the issue whether
but the whole point of the module was to finally distingwish between
Bytes and Chars and provide a base mechanism which allows machine and
compiler independant IO with haskell.. i mean what is the point of a
strong type system if we go out of our way to loose distinctions between
values, a raw byt
Thu, 31 Aug 2000 15:19:03 -0700, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> the definition of Byte as a type will help out incredibly, i have
> seen to many modules that define type Byte = Char, even the Posix
> stuff in hslibs does it; the existance of a 'proper' definition
> of Byte will at leas
Hello,
does type-checking remain decidable (in general) for overlapping instances
(:+o in hugs)?
--
Christoph
On 31-Aug-2000, William Lee Irwin III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> {hugs} Example> :type cmethod . fromNat $ 1
> {hugs} cmethod . fromNat $ 1 :: (C a, Q a) => a
>
> This is the expected typing, which I expect to be valid.
>
> But the inferencer chokes on an actual binding like the following:
> x
