Georg Martius wrote:
I was playing around with "Scap you Boilerplate" and realised some missing instances of Typeable and Data. Is there a particular reason why there is no Data Double instance?
There has been a Double instance under CVS (GHC HEAD) since March 2004. It will be included in GHC 6.4.
(BTW, this email should go to glasgow-haskell-users perhaps?)
Furthermore I was wondering why no instance for the collection types such as FiniteMap, Set and HashTable is provided.
Yes, once you start to use the SYB library you end up wanting it to cover almost all your types.
I will make an effort *now* hoping that all the instance can still make it into GHC 6,4.
(There are indeed a few more unsupported types that make obviously sense.)
I looked at the library source-code (GHC) and reallised that there is really much documenting comments in, but which are not Haddock comments. Again I don't understand that. Is the programmer supposed to look at the source-code rather the API documentation?
I wonder how other Haskellers think of that.
I tend to use non-Haddock comments whenever I want to document *implementation details*.
Is there an idiom for that; so that people get not confused?
Regards, Ralf
_______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
