Henning Thielemann wrote:
Why not just
FancySequence.fromList [1,2,3,4]
or
FancySequence.fromList $ 1:2:3:4:[]
?
Yes of course, but the same could be said for numbers, e.g when you need
an Int, you have to type (Int.fromNumber 1), (Float.fromNumber 1),
(Double.fromNumber 1), etc... I don't like that because it makes writing
numeric type independent generic code impossibe, so luckily the Haskell
compiler automatically inserts fromInteger or fromRational calls to lift
a generic number into a specific representation. But it does not provide
the same for lists, e.g. there is no fromList function which is a member
of some List typeclass that the compiler automatically uses just like it
does for numbers. I think this is a bit of a discrepancy.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
