Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| I think I've worked out what's going on now. But I don't like it.
| When I use -fallow-undecidable-instances and -fallow-overlapping-instances
| (as I did) I was assuming (like Keith Wansbrough did) that
| GHC would do a Prolog-style backtracking search when it
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Matthias Höchsmann wrote:
Hello,
I have the following problem:
basic datatypes
type Sequence a = [a]
data Tree a = N a (Forest a) deriving (Ord,Eq,Show)
type Forest a = Sequence (Tree a)
i want to construct a class Xy
class Xy s a where
test :: s
At 10:27 am -0700 26/10/00, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| I was reading some .net stuff (ducks) on microsoft, and they
| mentioned haskell as one of the languages someone was
| targetting for it.
| Anyone know anything about this project?
I know of several stabs in this direction, none completed.
Matthias Höchsmann wrote:
type Sequence a = [a]
data Tree a = N a (Forest a) deriving (Ord,Eq,Show)
type Forest a = Sequence (Tree a)
i want to construct a class Xy
class Xy s a where
test :: s a - a
[...]
instance ([] Tree) Char where
test x@(N a xs):txs = a
To
I mumbled:
This is not a legal type expression, since Tree is a
type constructor, not a ground type, so you cannot apply it to the list
constructor.
The other way round, of course: you cannot apply the list constructor to
it.
- Andreas
--
Andreas Rossberg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
::
Yes, I wanted to type it like you do.
But anyway, i fixed the problem following Andreas Rossbergs suggestion.
Matthias
Don't you mean
test (N a xs:txs) = a
?
/Lars L
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
Hi.
While experimenting with the implicit parameter
extension to Haskell 98, implemented in GHC 4.08.1
and latest Hugs, I came accross a difference among
those implementations regarding overloading functions
with implicit parameters.
As a test consider the
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:07:24AM -0700, Jeffrey R. Lewis wrote:
José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 09:08:16AM -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
Indeed Fran behaviors are like your alternative #1 (function passing), and
hence sharing loss is a concern. Simon PJ is right
