RE: deriving (was Re: storing to a file)
| I was thinking that it might be nice to be able to write Haskell to add, | say, a "deriving XML" or "deriving ASN1" feature whose instances provide | methods to convert between Haskell data structures and those formats, | instead of having to hack the compiler to achieve such automated method | writing. When Template Haskell is out, you'll be able to do just that, I think. Simon ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: deriving (was Re: storing to a file)
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, matt hellige wrote: (snip) > well, here's one way it might work: > http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/Papers/derive.htm I'll take a look at that - thanks - it might answer a few of my "generic programming" questions. > although i'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'add your own > "deriving" things'... :) I was thinking that it might be nice to be able to write Haskell to add, say, a "deriving XML" or "deriving ASN1" feature whose instances provide methods to convert between Haskell data structures and those formats, instead of having to hack the compiler to achieve such automated method writing. BTW, those typed returns on sockets that Shawn mentioned sounded interesting. IIRC Modula-3 also had some approach to worrying about data exchange between older and newer versions of the same program. -- Mark ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: deriving (was Re: storing to a file)
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 09:56:24AM -0500, Mark Carroll wrote: > Actually, "deriving binary" would be a nice > thing to have in general - even more, a way to add your own "deriving" > things from within Haskell, although I have no idea how such a thing would > work. well, here's one way it might work: http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/Papers/derive.htm although i'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'add your own "deriving" things'... :) matt -- matt hellige [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://matt.immute.net ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: deriving (was Re: storing to a file)
> Actually, there's one situation where it would work easily, and that > is when used with newtype. Apart from "Show" and "Read", which are > special cases anyway, the "deriving" operation on newtype has a simple > meaning: inherit instances from the type being wrapped. GHC does this on newtypes already. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
deriving (was Re: storing to a file)
G'day all. On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 09:56:24AM -0500, Mark Carroll wrote: > Actually, "deriving binary" would be a nice > thing to have in general - even more, a way to add your own "deriving" > things from within Haskell, although I have no idea how such a thing would > work. Actually, there's one situation where it would work easily, and that is when used with newtype. Apart from "Show" and "Read", which are special cases anyway, the "deriving" operation on newtype has a simple meaning: inherit instances from the type being wrapped. Thoughts? Cheers, Andrew Bromage ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
