Thanks. I'll go with the monad for now.
Geoffrey
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Lennart
Augustsson wrote:
> Use 1. You'll probably need a monad in the type checker soon or later
> anyway, e.g., for handling errors.
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:13 AM, Zsolt Dollenstein wrote:
> I think you shoul
Use 1. You'll probably need a monad in the type checker soon or later
anyway, e.g., for handling errors.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Geoffrey Irving wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am designing a type inference algorithm for a language with
> arbitrary function overloading. For various reasons (beyon
Hello,
I am designing a type inference algorithm for a language with
arbitrary function overloading. For various reasons (beyond the scope
of this email), it's impossible to know the full type of an overloaded
function, so each function is assigned a unique primitive type and the
inference algori
