Robert Will wrote:
Note that in an OO programming language with generic classes ...
(We shouldn't make our functional designs more different from the OO ones,
than they need to be.)
why should *we* care :-)
more often than not, OO design is resticted and misleading.
you see how most OO
Robert Will wrote:
Now I would like to have Collection to be a superclass of Map yielding the
following typing
reduce :: (Map map a b) =
((a, b) - c) - c
- map a b - c
Note that in an OO programming language with generic classes (which is in
general much less
--- Robert Will [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- Here
-- is a quesion for the
-- most creative of thinkers: which is the design
(in
-- proper Haskell or a
-- wide-spread extension) possibly include much
-- intermediate type classes and
-- other stuff, that comes nearest to my desire?
Hello,
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Robert Will wrote:
Hello,
As you will have noticed, I'm designing a little library of Abstract Data
Structuresm here is a small excerpt to get an idea:
class Collection coll a where
...
(+) :: coll a - coll a - coll a
reduce :: (a - b) - b
