On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Thomas Conway wrote: > Is there any deep and meaningful reason why Haskell doesn't have > anonymous discriminated union types? > > I'm thinking of an example like: > > data Amount = Amount Integer (Mg|G|Kg|T) > > Now this particular case is perhaps unconvincing - a seperate Units > type would be quite sensible, however I'm thinking of translating > ASN.1 definitions into Haskell. ASN.1 allows SEQUENCE (record types) > and CHOICE (discriminated unions) as a kind of type constructor. > > Not having to invent names for anonymous SEQUENCE and CHOICE types > would be nice.
I'm afraid you have to invent these names. Btw. if you want to do more with units, see http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/PhysicalUnits _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
