Alex Ferguson wrote:
>
> Kevin Atkinson:
> > I never, ever, said that I would like Haskell to be able to do
> > everything C++ can.
>
> No, that was my inference from the general drift of your comments.
>
> I also never said that I want Haskell to become a
> > more type unsafe language. If it was implied I'm sorry. What I did say
> > that I would like Haskell to support true ad-hoc overloading which you
> > seam to bitterly oppose to spite its many benefits.
>
> Hardly 'bitterly'. I just wish to observe that it: involves a
> considerable technical complication, at least, if one wishes to
> preserve sensible typing properties; adds no actual power to the
> language, whatsoever; is a _highly questionable_ practice from
> a human factors POV; and, well, what were the benefits, again?
I listed some of them in previous posts which you chose to ignore.
> I think it should be eminently possible to write a good generic
> container class without resorting to either dynamic typing, or to
> ad hoc polymorphism. (I don't see how these would really help,
> actually.)
Neither of them will. Sorry if I implied a connection. What I DO need
is a solution is a better solution to multi parameter classes.
> There are likely still 'issues' with doing this properly
> with MPCs, I can well believe that: the 'exploring the design
> space' document, and some other papers, examine relaxing/generalising
> the rules for class defaults and overlapping instances, in many
> reasonable-seeming, though also technically tricky, directions.
> It may be worth looking at least, if you're certain existing MPC
> implentations don't allow everything you want to do with containers.
Yes MPC is too limiting. I have tried. See my post "Limititions of
Haskell Type System (was Re: OO in Haskell)".
> > Ok here is my partial list.
> >
> > - True ad-doc polymorphism
> > - Built in dynamic typing system.
> > - State Encapsulation
> > - A solution to the abilities arising from multi parameter type classes.
> > - Syntactic sugar for supporting OO programming styles
>
> You should try C++ sometime, some people _highly_ recommend it
> for the above. ;-)
I take it what you really want me to do is just shut up and leave and
to stop trying to change the Haskell language into something you think
its not.
--
Kevin Atkinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/
