Luke Palmer wrote:
There was a thread about this recently.
In any case, if you load the code interpreted (which happens if there
is no .o or .hi file of the module lying around), then you can
look inside all you want. But if it loads compiled, then you only
have access to the exported symbols.
There was a thread about this recently.
In any case, if you load the code interpreted (which happens if there
is no .o or .hi file of the module lying around), then you can
look inside all you want. But if it loads compiled, then you only
have access to the exported symbols. The reason is becaus
Thomas Davie wrote:
Take a look at the Typable class. Although, pretty much any code that
you can compile can be loaded into ghci without modification, and that's
by far the easier way of finding the types of things.
Is there a way to make ghci to know also the symbols which are not exported?
On Dec 17, 2007 8:18 AM, Nicholls, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The approach is deliberate...but I accept may be harder than it needs to
> be...I'm interested in Haskell because of the alleged power/formality of
> it's type system against the relatively weakness of OO ones...the irony
> at th
On Dec 17, 2007 1:18 PM, Nicholls, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not really with this...
>
> The open case (as in OO) seems to be more like the Haskell class
> construct, i.e. if new types declare themselves to be members of a class
> then they must satisfy certain constaintsI can then spec
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nicholls, Mark
>
> The open case (as in OO) seems to be more like the Haskell class
> construct, i.e. if new types declare themselves to be members
> of a class
> then they must satisfy certain constaintsI can then
> specify
are unpleasantly tangled.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of apfelmus
Sent: 17 December 2007 12:34
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: [Haskell-cafe] Re: OOP'er with (hopefully) trivial
questions.
Nicholls, Mark wrote:
>
> data Shape = C
Nicholls, Mark wrote:
data Shape = Circle Int
| Rectangle Int Int
| Square Int
Isn't this now "closed"...i.e. the statement is effectively defining
that shape is this and only ever thisi.e. can I in another module
add new "types" of Shape?
Yes, but in most case
