On 29 November 2011 07:28, Daniel Díaz Casanueva <dhelta.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Cafe, > > I only feel curious about what would be the consequences of becoming the > Overloaded Strings feature (currently, an extension) to be default in > Haskell. This is not a proposal. I just want to know what pros and > cons there are.
One cons would be that you may need some more explicit type signatures being used: I have the situation in my graphviz library where both Text and String have instances of some classes (e.g. Labellable, which has a method toLabel :: (Labellable a) => a -> Label) which result in explicit "String" values in the source code result in the compiler not knowing which instance to use (e.g. toLabel "hi"). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
