Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 03.12.2009, 01:16 +0100 schrieb Martijn van Steenbergen: > So here's a totally wild idea Sjoerd and I came up with. > > What if newtypes were unwrapped implicitly? > > What advantages and disadvantages would it have? > In what cases would this lead to ambiguous code?
not sure if this is what you are thinking at, but everytime I wrap a type Foo in a newtype MyFoo to define my own instances (or just for more expressiveness code), I wish I had a way to tell the compiler: „Please define function myfoo to be the same as foo, with all occurences of Foo in its type signature replaced by MyFoo.“ Instead I find my self writing manually code like myfoo :: (Blubb -> MyFoo) -> MyFoo -> MyFoo -> MyFoo myfoo f (MyFoo a) (MyFoo b) = MyFoo (foo (unMyFoo . f) a b) I guess TH could probably do this. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner mail: [email protected] | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Key: 4743206C JID: [email protected] | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ Debian Developer: [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
