On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2008 16:31 schrieben Sie: > > > > Even if () would be preferred from the programmers point of view (I'm > > not sure how much we could reduce the number of instances though), it > > makes the representation less attractive on the user-side. Anyone > > using the library would find it annoying and would wonder why is it > > neccessary. > > I wouldn’t wonder. Leaving out the () :* part just works because our > type-level “values” are not typed, i.e., there aren’t different kinds Digit > and Number but only kind *. If :+ would be a data constructor (on the value > level), it would take a number and a digit argument which would forbid using > a digit as its left argument. So I consider using a digit on the left > as “unclean”. It’s similar to using a number as the second part of a cons > cell in LISP.
seconded _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe