On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic < ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmm.... this is an interesting way of doing it, but I would argue that > it's pointless: the fact that you're using MPTCs doesn't give you > anything extra that the original class. Furthermore, as I said earlier, > it doesn't make sense to constrain the label type just to make an > instance of a type class. > > (Now, if we had other functions in there which _might_ depend on the > label types, this _would_ make sense; as it stands however, it doesn't.) > Try removing "Cls a" from the instance. You'll notice that my empty does depend on a having a Cls instance because it will fail to compile. In other words, I don't understand what you're talking about. I did need the constraint to define my instance. And if that example gets boring, try making an instance of Set for Monad. Then re-read the article I linked from Oleg's website. I'm not understanding your point, and I suspect you're not understanding mine :) Jason
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
