llent report.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Volker Stolz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 13 December 2000 08:29
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Type checker too lazy
|
|
| Consider the following record (yes, I know, we all hate records but
| I use them frequently for read-onl
> data Record = R {
> blub :: Foo a => a -> [a]
> }
Wouldn't the pure-Haskell'98 definition
data Foo a => Record a = R {
blub :: a -> [a]
}
work as well, if not better? Certainly, ghc accepts both of
> print (bar (3::Int)) -- works!
> print ((blub r) (3::Int)) --
Consider the following record (yes, I know, we all hate records but
I use them frequently for read-only data):
> import IO
>
> class Foo a where
> bar :: a -> [a]
>
> instance Foo Int where
> bar x = replicate x x
>
> data Record = R {
> blub :: Foo a => a -> [a]
> }
>
> main = d
