On 11/22/06, Andrew Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think this deviates from Haskell, which seems to be big on > > structural type equivalence (?).
I may be mistaken, but I thought that in Haskell, if there's a typeclass composed of methods X and Y (with appropriate signatures), every object that implements X and Y (with those signatures) is *automatically* assumed to be a member of that typeclass? Since I've never used Haskell and all my knowledge of it is from reading about it in Phillip's posts (I've never even followed any of the links he gave) I may well be mistaken. Anyway, I don't care so much about Haskell or whether we copy it; I care about the specific rules/ideas I posted. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
