On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Dan Doel <dan.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Sorry if you get this twice, Ertugrul; and if I reply to top. I'm > stuck with the gmail interface and I'm not used to it.) > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez <e...@ertes.de> wrote: > > I don't see any problem with this. Although I usually have a bottom-up > > approach, so I don't do this too often, it doesn't hurt, when I have to. > > I do. It's low tech and inconvenient. > > Whenever I program in Haskell, I miss Agda's editing features, where I > can write: > > foo : Signature > foo x y z = ? > > Then compile the file. The ? stands in for a term of any type, and > becomes a 'hole' in my code. The editing environment will then tell me > what type of term I have to fill into the hole, and give me > information on what is available in the scope. Then I can write: > > You can simulate that with a type class. The "no instance" error substitutes for the "term". class Hole obj where hole :: obj foo :: Blah foo x y z = hole "No instance for type Blah" Presumably, you wouldn't want to make instances. I use a similar construct for monic and epic functions, since the natural ones tend to be unique enough.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
