Robert Dockins wrote:
] In the second instance, what you really want to say is "instance c [a]
] c, only where c is not an application of (->)". As I recall, there is
] a way to express such type equality/unequality using typeclasses, but
] I don't remember how to do it offhand.
For those pla
Robert Dockins wrote:
>
> To make this work, you're going to have to convince the compiler to accept
> "overlapping instances" and then make sure they don't overlap :) In the
> second instance, what you really want to say is "instance c [a] c, only where
> c is not an application of (->)". As
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 08:22 pm, Greg Buchholz wrote:
> Lately, in my quest to get a better understanding of the typeclass
> system, I've been writing my typeclass instance declarations in Prolog
> first, then when I've debugged them, I port them over back over to
> Haskell. The porting proc
Lately, in my quest to get a better understanding of the typeclass
system, I've been writing my typeclass instance declarations in Prolog
first, then when I've debugged them, I port them over back over to
Haskell. The porting process involves a lot trial and error on my part
trying to decide w
