Ralf,
Technically this is trivial it seems. I think that some people
consider this proposal a problem because typos (misspelled type
parameters) immediately lead to the accidental exploration of a more
advanced type-system feature and correspondingly more involved error
messages. Of course,
Does anyone know if the source code for the embedded prolog (by Silvija
Seres Michael Spivey) is available for download from anywhere? I have
read the paper and found some of the types are wrong, some critical
definitions are missing, and the definition of unify is missing.
Regards,
I don't even want this feature. :-)
The point being that datatype declarations, *as such*, are explicit
anyhow.
Why bother about the explicit quantifiers then?
Of course, in a language with inferred datatypes I would mind.
That's an interesting question!
I also wouldn't (yet?!) support this
On 8/17/05, Ralf Lammel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't even want this feature. :-)
The point being that datatype declarations, *as such*, are explicit
anyhow.
Why bother about the explicit quantifiers then?
Of course, in a language with inferred datatypes I would mind.
That's an
Hello,
I'm thinking about (re)writing some perl code in Haskell (for performance and
correctness reasons). Has anyone done much with Oracle and Haskell? So far
I've gotten takusen (http://cvs.sf.net/viewcvs.py/haskell-libs/libs/takusen/)
to compile and run on my Suse 9.3 x86-64 box against
