Brian Smith: > When using AT then we have to decide what part of the abstraction is > the class and what part is the associated type. Sometimes this seams > arbitrary. If we have: > > class A a where > type B b > f :: a -> B b > instance A Int where > type B = Bool > f = (==0) > > Can't we also rewrite it as: > > class B b where > type A a > f :: A a -> b > instance B Bool where > type A = Int > f = (==0)
If it is arbitrary, you should use a two parameter class. The bias in an associated type is on purpose; ie, an associated type should be used if one type depends on the other. Bulat wrote: > > Also, has anybody written a paper on the differences between > > typeclasses + associated types and ML's module system + > overloading? > > "ML Modules and Haskell Type Classes: A Constructive Comparison" > http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~wehr/diplom/Wehr_ML_modules_and_Haskell_type_classes.pdf In addition to this comparison, there is now also a proposal for type classes with associated types as a mode of use of ML modules. See our forthcoming POPL paper: http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/papers/DHC07.html Ie, this gives you ML modules + overloading. Manuel _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
