Bertram Felgenhauer-2 wrote
>> 1. If the compiler encounters a term f a, and there is more than one
>> definition for f in scope (after following all of the usual rules for
>> qualified imports);
>>
>> 2. And exactly one of these definitions matches the type of a (or the
>> expected type of f if g
Jeremy . wrote:
> Yes, that it indeed was I meant. AntC seems to be replying to a much
> more complicated/invasive proposal than what I had intended, apologies
> if I wasn't clear. (I see in retrospect that I may have misunderstood
> the original TDNR proposal, understandably leading to confusion.)
Henning Thielemann wrote
> I know people are unhappy with Haskell's records and module system, but I
> still think that's because these language features are not used properly.
> Type classes are the tool to write generic code and reduce combinatoric
> explosion of functions and modules are a wa
On Sun, 22 May 2016, Jeremy . wrote:
1. If the compiler encounters a term f a, and there is more than one definition
for f in scope (after following all of
the usual rules for qualified imports);
2. And exactly one of these definitions matches the type of a (or the expected
type of f if give
Yes, that it indeed was I meant. AntC seems to be replying to a much more
complicated/invasive proposal than what I had intended, apologies if I wasn't
clear. (I see in retrospect that I may have misunderstood the original TDNR
proposal, understandably leading to confusion.)
1. If the compiler
