On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 08:07:39PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Tomasz Zielonka wrote: > > The papers on GADTs have an example showing how you can transform, > > traverse and evaluate ASTs (or terms) with more type safety. I've > > used such an approach in one of my applications and it works remarkably > > well. > > > > However, I would like to be able to "turn off" that type-safety > > in some parts of code, for example to separate parsing from typing. > > I thought I found a way to do this, because I was able to create Typed > > (with all consistency checking) and Untyped (without consistency > > checking) terms. Unfortunately I seem to be unable to write any useful > > function on such terms - GHC complains that there are type errors. > > The present message shows what seems to be a more fruitful approach to > writing terms whose typechecking can be `postponed', perhaps > indefinitely. The approach tries to play to the strengths of GADTs and > avoid their weaknesses. > [...]
Wow! This is cool! But I'm not sure how far I can go with this approach. I'll see if this can be used to separate parsing from type-checking. Best regards Tomasz -- I am searching for a programmer who is good at least in some of [Haskell, ML, C++, Linux, FreeBSD, math] for work in Warsaw, Poland _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
