Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> that i want to say is what the first variant allows to define type of
> 'x' in such way that the only Show-specific operations are allowed,
Why? A class is not a type. Haskell has no non-trivial subtyping.
If it's always a string, then it can be treated as a string. Haskell
is not Java and can't be coerced to Java without a major redesign of
the type system.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
[email protected]
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
