Michael~
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:44:37 -0500, Michael Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey, > > On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:33:27 -0500, Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Strong typing can be more clearly seen in something like haskell where > > you can define a function > > > > len [] = 0 > > len [ _ | A ] = 1 + len A > Actually, in Haskell this would be: > > len [] = 0 > len (_:a) = 1 + len a > > > the compile will automatically detect that the len function has the > > signature "list of * -> int" > In Haskell this would be: > forall a b. (Num b) => [a] -> b > > (A function from a list of things to an arbitrary numeric type. That's > sexy, btw.) > > > and will then issue a compile time error if you call len "foo". > As Strings in Haskell are lists of chars, this will work just fine <wink> ;-) > > Confusingly yours, > Michael > I should have known there would be a real Haskell fan in the room... Thanks for the catch, Matt -- "Computer Science is merely the post-Turing Decline of Formal Systems Theory." -???
