I have not understood what the question is. Are you asking "Why would one need functions of the form (Integral a) => ...a... if one can just use ...Integer... or ...Int... explicitly"?
2009/11/27 Tsunkiet Man <[email protected]>: > 2009/11/27 Miguel Mitrofanov <[email protected]> >> >> >> Tsunkiet Man wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> I would like to ask wheter there are other instances of the class >>> Integral? >> >> Lots of them. You can define a few of them yourself, you know. > > Yes, I knew that =). >> >>> And I would like to ask what the difference is between the following >>> functions: SomeFunctionA :: (Integral a) => a -> a, >> >> Perfectly correct. >> >>> SomeFunctionB (Integer a) => a -> a, SomeFunctionC (Int a) => a -> a. >> >> Both incorrect. >> >> Integral is a class, but Integer and Int are types. >> >>> What I do know is, that the Int can have underflow and overflows, however >>> I don't actually see the difference (and I can't really find a difference on >>> Google as it gives me results that aren't really relevant to my question) >>> between prefering to use an Integral a when I've already got an Integer. >> >> Sorry, didn't understand your question. > > Was not really a question ^_^ >> >> >>> >>> (Assuming I didn't missed the definiton of a Integral, which has by >>> definition (I looked it up on Google: >>> http://www.zvon.org/other/haskell/Outputprelude/Integral_c.html) has two >>> instances) >> >> No. It makes no sense to say "by definition ... has that number of >> instances". Instances of class are not included in it's definition and could >> be defined separately. > > Ah I see! >> >>> Can someone explain to me what kind of advantages and disadvantages I >>> would get when substituting SomeFunctionB for someFunctionA? >> >> Working program would certainly be an advantage. > > >> >> What if it both works? Should I take the "highest level"? >>> >>> Thank you for your help! >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > This is actually all related to my homework problem which I can't seem to > get a usefull answer out. Cause it tells me that a definition with Integrals > would be much more general. It can support other instances of the class > Integral. And then it asks me what the difference the definition has, > actually it has none. Because I only use functions in de Prelude that are > defined for Integrals. > > Correct me if I'm wrong with this =). > > I don't really understand how I should answer this homework question as it > makes no sense in my opinion give me the answer and then asking me the > question xD. > > Thanks for your quick response! > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > -- Eugene Kirpichov Web IR developer, market.yandex.ru _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
