robert dockins wrote:
Why remove a feature from a product? Why not, instead, just choose to
not use it?
Because the feature complicates the product, increases maintainance
costs, and keeps the maintainers from working on other things people
care more about?
That's fair. I just hope the implicit parameter implementation is
orthogonal enough that it's worth keeping around.
I think the motivating examples in "Implicit parameters: dynamic scoping
with static types" (http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/246042.html&e=10342) are
at least as compelling as those in the just-implemented
(http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cvs.all/19423)
"Associated types with class",
(http://research.microsoft.com/Users/simonpj/papers/assoc-types/), but
maybe it's just me.
Jim
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
