On 9 September 2010 12:10, wren ng thornton <w...@freegeek.org> wrote: > I think the shape of the classes for singletons, insert, coinsert, and union > still needs some work. For instance, the definitions I've given earlier were > assuming a (multi)set-like or sequence-like container, but we can also > reasonably extend it to include map-like containers. The only trick is that > set/seq-like containers have a single type parameter and a single element > argument, whereas map-like containers have a pair of type parameters and a > key--value pair of "elements". So we'd need to do something with MPTCs in > order to unify them.
Yes, I'm not sure if Map-like types of kind * -> * -> * should have a "value" of type (a,b) or then have BiFunctor, BiBuildable, etc. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
