rrnewton at gmail.com
Mon Aug 15 22:59:40 CEST 2011
> My only input is that we have at least 2-3 (depending on whether the
> latter two are to be considered separate) hierarchies in want of
> refactoring: Functor/Applicative/Monad, Num and friends, and Monoid.
> Ideally any solution would "solve the problem" for all of them, but
> even if it doesn't (and only solves, say, Monad's case), I think it
> should be a requirement that it at least allows for the others to be
> solved as well in an incremental fashion afterwards (whether by
> 'upgrading' the by-then existing feature, or adding a new, orthogonal
> one). The undesirable scenario would be where you would have to
> "change the world" all over again a second time to resolve the
> remaining problems.
Another place where this might help would be with the
If "design goal 1" is met, then clients would not have to refactor their
Random instance to match the new class factoring.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users