On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 06:42:59PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
data Datatype ex = forall vt . Datatype (DatatypeVal ex vt)
In practice one rarely would write
forall vt. Datatype (DatatypeVal ex vt)
unless he is writing something like the ST monad.
You can only pass vt to
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:42:48AM +0200, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
However this approach has caveats. For example you can't store the state
of Stat and restart it later. All steps are done within one call to
runStat.
I was wrong. I can write:
updateStat :: Stat i o - i - Stat i o
updateStat
At 18:42 02/10/03 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Therefore, when you
quantify a value, you typically want to impose a constraint
forall vt. (C vt) = Datatype (DatatypeVal ex vt)
That's a useful observation, thanks.
I've had a enough cases recently where I found that a class doesn't
I completely agree with Thomas Hallgren's message. I also view the IO
monad as a temporary solution and regret that research into better lazy
IO seems to have stoped.
Well, not everywhere. Since noone else has mentioned it so far,
it is worth throwing in the obligatory reference to the
This seems to me like one of those frustrating problems... if you are
comfortable with the language then why it works is obvious, but it's
difficult to explain why it's obvious. (My mathematical analysis lecturer
often used to say if it's obvious then either it's an assumption or it can
be
I am guessing this is how the data got accumulated:
in you my_store, the function stored is like
\w - if w == 'a'
then 3
else if w == 'b'
then 5
else if w == 'a'
then 4
else (\w - 0 ) w
'a' is stored twice
