Cristian Baboi wrote:
While reading the Haskell language report I noticed that function type
is not an instance of class Read.
I was told that one cannot define them as an instance of class Show
without breaking "referential transparency" or printing a constant.
f :: (a->b)->String
f x = "bla bla bla"
How can I define a function to do the inverse operation ?
g :: String -> ( a -> b )
This time I cannot see how referential transparency will deny it.
What's the excuse now ?
The new excuse is that a better name for g is
full-fledged-compiler :: String -> (Int -> Int)
(the function returned by g better not have a polymorphic type). Which
programming language should the argument String be written in?
Regards
apfelmus
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
