On 2008.08.31 11:21:44 -0700, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled 1.0K
characters:
> The point of having a strongly typed language is so the compiler can
> do more work for you. But right now I do a lot of typing (pun not
> intended) to appease the compiler.
>
> Let me give you an example:
>
> module Prob where
> import qualified Data.Map as M
>
> newtype Prob p a = Prob { runProb :: [(a,p)] }
>
> combine :: (Num p, Ord a) => Prob p a -> Prob p a
> combine m = Prob $
> M.assocs $
> foldl' (flip $ uncurry $ M.insertWith (+)) M.empty $
> runProb m
>
> Do you see it? All those "M." just seem dirty to me, especially
> because the compiler should be able to deduce them from the types of
> the arguments.
>
> My proposal is to allow "ad-hoc" overloading of names; if a name is
> ambiguous in a scope, attempt to type-check the expression against
> each name. It is only an error if type-checking against all names
> fails. If type-checking succeeds for more than one then the
> expression is ambiguous and this is also an error.
>
> Pros: shorter code, less busywork to please the compiler
> Cons: potentially exponential compile time?
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> -- ryanI think this would be very nice in GHCi, because there the situation is even *worse*. I think we've all experienced importing Data.Map or Data.ByteString and discovering we need to tediously write it out in *full*, because we can't even do qualified imports of it! -- gwern BND fritz FKS 1071 Face government Tomahawk DREO IA O
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
