On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Aaron Denney wrote:

Basically, my big objection is that it's hard to define many useful
operations on them that are statically safe.

Why not defining the Torsor class you suggested?

Any definition of Num a for instance leaves a whole bunch of unsafe methods, or just plain inapplicable methods, such as "negate".

Yes Num class is quite inappropriate.

Now granted, the numeric hierarchy should be broken up a bit (hmm, I
should finish my strawman proposal for Haskell'), but even then I see
problems.

Hm, is there something going on? Without breaking compatibility? But class instances become invalid if the hierarchy is modified. If there is some progress towards a refined numeric class hierarchy I want to point again to
 http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/numericprelude/
 http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/numericprelude/src/Algebra/Core.lhs
  I hope I don't annoy you. :-)
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to