Well the definition clearly falls under the monomorphism restriction as
laid down by the Report, because you haven't given a signature for
us,n,j. I suggest
ctPar :: (?ctPar::CTPar) = CTPar
ctPar = ?ctPar
(us,n,j) = ctPar
That should work
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Jorge Adriano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 13 February 2003 14:36
| To: Haskell Cafe; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Pattern matching, implict par. question
|
| Hello, When trying
|
| type CTPar = ([Double],Int,Int)
| ctPar ::(?ctPar::CTPar)=CTPar
| ctPar@(us,n,j) = ?ctPar
|
| I got this error message in ghci is:
| Illegal overloaded type signature(s)
| in a binding group for ctPar, us, n, j
| that falls under the monomorphism restriction
| When generalising the type(s) for ctPar, us, n, j
| Failed, modules loaded: CrossTypeOps.
|
| Should the monomorphis restriction really apply here?
| The values of us,j,n do depend on the context, but not their types
(right?).
|
| J.A.
|
|
| ___
| Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
