On 02/07/13 10:57, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Here is Plan A: use fundep (or type function)
class Has r f t | r f -> t where
getFld :: r -> t
instance Has (R a) “foo” (a -> a) where ..
instance Has S “bar” (forall b. b -> b) where ...
Lacking (as we still do) impredicative polymorphism, the S instance declaration
is rejected.
How common are such polymorphic fields in practice? You sometimes see them in
newtype wrappers and the like. But I think those are not cases where you want
overlapping names anyway.
So: why not use a Plan A style class, except for polymorphic fields? Perhaps you
could still have a (less polymorphic) class for bar above,
class HasBar r where
getBar :: r -> b -> b
Twan
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
