Excerpts from Adam Chlipala's message of Mon Nov 28 15:19:04 +0100 2011: > Perhaps it would be useful for you to review the concept of type classes > in Haskell. They are very similar in Ur. I know the Haskell concept inside out. I'm still new to ur :)
> Two solutions that come to mind: > 1) Add an [eq a] argument to [le]. That's what the tutorial did? Does work now. Sorry for the noise. Don't know what I did wrong previously. > 2) Extend the definition of [strict_less a] to contain an [eq a], too. > (Though this seems to create some dissonance with the words "strict less"!) That would have been structure My_Ord class strict_less a = (eq a) -> a -> a -> bool ... ? I hopefully finally got it. Thanks. Marc Weber _______________________________________________ Ur mailing list [email protected] http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
