Re: Revamping the numeric classes

[Ketil Malde]

Bjorn Lisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>> Two interpretations of a code are "correct", but one is "more correct"
>> than the other.

> It is quite similar in spirit to the concept of principal type in
> Hindley-Milner type systems. An expression can have many types but
> only one "best" (most general) type in that system.

Now, I'm not any kind of expert on this, but isn't the most general
HM type one that encompasses the others, and *not* one out of a set of
ambigous (and mutually exclusive) types?

-kzm
-- 
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell