What about just implementing the cheapest solution that still gets
us most
of the way?
(3) If it is as cheap (to implement) as advertised then there is no
great
risk involved. If it turns out the missing features are a great
show-stopper for some people (which I don't believe) then let them
present
their case afterwards, with good examples at hand. We can still
decide to
aim for a higher goal in the long term.
If in doubt, chose the solution that is easier to implement.
Since this paper, there have been several proposals which can be 90%
implemented as libraries, using either functional dependencies or
associated types. These all have much more expressive type systems
than the SPJ paper, yet need very little compiler support. The
question is, which one (if any) should get this small but necessary
support?
Barney.
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
