On 6/16/07, David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hope that's clear. I know it's pretty brief. My implementation actually uses unsafeCoerce# internally when parsing Conflicted patches. We could have avoided this by storing the inverse of the conflicted patch and its context, but it didn't seem worth the change. The code would have been more elegant, but I think the patches would have been more confusing.
Your explanation helps a lot. I think I see the need for Sealed now. I also see that MyEq could return Sealed EqCheck and avoid the unsafeCoerce# but it would be overkill. I need to think more about the hypothetical change to Conflicted patches. I'm not sure I understand how that also solves the problem. Thanks, Jason _______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
