[Haskell-cafe] Class-like features for explicit arguments
ertesx at gmx.de
Sat Apr 25 15:43:03 UTC 2015
> Isn't your associated type here more like a dependent record field/
> existential that we can kinda expose?
Not quite. There is still a clear distinction between type and value
level. You cannot refer to an AT on the value level or to a member
value on the type level.
> This does seem to veer into first class module territory. Especially
> wrt needing first class types in a fashion.
I think formally there is little difference between a powerful record
system and a first-class module system. However, even in a
non-dependent language a first class module could still expect a value
argument. A record type couldn't do this without essentially making the
language dependent on the way.
> Have you had a chance to peruse the Andreas Rossberg 1ml paper on
> embedding first class modules into f omega that has been circulating?
> Perhaps there are ideas There that could be adapted. Especially since
> core is an augmented f omega
I haven't read it, sorry. My proposal should conform to the current
core language, as it's mostly just a syntax transformation. The only
new semantics would be defaults.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 472 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Haskell-Cafe