Lloyd, From: Lloyd Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: class Function ? Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:54:30 +1100 (EST)
> Almost certainly this is either > . easy and obvious or > . unnecessary or > . impossible > for some a well-known reason. Which is it please? ... > > > I would like to have a ``class Function'' which has the > operators ``$'', ``.'', etc. and *most* particularly ``'', > so that one can define sub-classes of Function > (e.g. functions having inverses, say) that can still > be applied in the usual way, i.e. ``f x''. Maybe you would also find this proposal interesting: Title Wishlist: MixFix syntax Current URL http://www.mail-archive.com/haskell@;haskell.org/msg04781.html in particular [..] Having a type > newtype Subst = [Name :->: Term] > instance Show Subst where > ... and be able to write > oper _ _ :: Subst -> Term -> Term where > sigma t = ... [..] Marko _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
