On 21 February 2015 at 21:39, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Choose one gets the following type I think: > > > > fn (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) -> 'c > > > > Inferred from the application of 'f'. > > That can't be right. The third argument will be a bool. Did you even > read the message I referred to? Rhetorical question. I'm fed up for now. > Based on this: On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:57 PM, William ML Leslie < > [email protected]> wrote: > I'm a bit uncomfortable with what happens in the case of let-bound > native-arity-polymorphic case: > let f = choose_one x y z -- different arities > in f n m > > How do you choose a native arity for the callsite? I don't see a bool argument? Then again I have no idea what the type of choose_one is so I just guessed that it randomly picks on one x y and z that each would have different arities inferred from their definitions. > I'm done. We're not getting anywhere until you put more effort into > making a self-contained explanation of your proposal that is not > woefully incomplete. > It's a shame, I thought we were getting somewhere, and you made some very useful contributions. Maybe someone else would like to take a turn coaxing a real proposal > out of Keean. Well, its probably wasn't a very good idea in the first place. Still I think I might implement it and see how it behaves. Cheers, Keean.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
