On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:08:59AM +0100, Andres Loeh wrote:
> > >I didn't fully understand this requirement. If Haskell-prime gets
> > >rank-2 or rank-n types, then do we need to restrict constructors in this
> > >way?
>
> Ok, this really boils down to the question of whether we do rank-2 or
> rank-n types. I'm biased, because I actually use rank-n types
> frequently, and feel somewhat limited by the rank-2 restrictions. I
> don't know how many people actually do, though. I can understand
> Iavor's points that rank-2 might be easier to explain, but at least
> GHC's rank-n extension has a very detailed paper explaining it, so I
> guess it's one of the better documented extensions.
I would say there is not much point in doing just rank-2. Once you know
how to do rank-n (and we do, thanks to SPJ's great paper) then it is
just as easy to implement as rank-2. Perhaps even moreso since it is a
rather elegant general change to the type inferencer rather than a
special case.
John
--
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
