[Haskell-cafe] Re: Dynamic binding / Scala paper

2005-06-30 Thread Benjamin Franksen
On Friday 24 June 2005 14:28, Andreas Rossberg wrote: Ralf Lammel wrote: I would like to add a peer-reviewed clear reference to the OOHaskell paper about the red herring that you mention. I don't have such a reference. May I kindly ask you to offer a few for selection? Off-hand, I

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Dynamic binding / Scala paper

2005-06-30 Thread Colin Paul Adams
Benjamin == Benjamin Franksen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Benjamin Ok, Eiffel has a few holes in its type-system, doesn't Benjamin naturally integrate with Java/.Net, and doesn't support In what way? Eiffel compilers target these systems successfully. Benjamin XML directly. How do

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Dynamic binding / Scala paper

2005-06-30 Thread Benjamin Franksen
On Thursday 30 June 2005 23:21, Colin Paul Adams wrote: Benjamin == Benjamin Franksen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Benjamin Ok, Eiffel has a few holes in its type-system, doesn't Benjamin naturally integrate with Java/.Net, and doesn't support In what way? Eiffel compilers target

Re: [Haskell-cafe] no dynamic binding

2004-09-21 Thread Graham Klyne
I think others have provided the immediate answers to your question, so I'll skip that. But, standing back, you seem to have fallen prey to a misunderstanding I made when learning Haskell, thinking that a class is directly analogous to a class in OO languages. While there are similarities,

Re: [Haskell-cafe] no dynamic binding

2004-09-20 Thread Tomasz Zielonka
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 08:54:57PM +0200, Georg Martius wrote: Hi, it might be better to use a simple abstact data type for it like: You probably meant algebraic data type. Abstractness isn't essential here. Best regards, Tom -- .signature: Too many levels of symbolic links

Re: [Haskell-cafe] no dynamic binding

2004-09-20 Thread Tomasz Zielonka
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 02:46:12PM -0400, Abraham Egnor wrote: You can use exisential types to do what you'd like. From memory, so there are probably errors: newtype ServerCommand = forall a. ServerCommandClass a = ServerCommand a This can't be newtype, you must use 'data'. instance

Re: [Haskell-cafe] no dynamic binding

2004-09-19 Thread Abraham Egnor
You can use exisential types to do what you'd like. From memory, so there are probably errors: newtype ServerCommand = forall a. ServerCommandClass a = ServerCommand a instance ServerCommandClass ServerCommand where toString (ServerCommand c) = toString c commands :: [ServerCommand]

Re: [Haskell-cafe] no dynamic binding

2004-09-19 Thread Georg Martius
Hi, it might be better to use a simple abstact data type for it like: -- | Command Type has for all possible actions a contructor data Command = INIT String String Bool -- ^ Teamname, Version, Goalkeeper or not | RECONNECT String Integer -- ^ Teamname, Playernum (Unum) |