[Haskell-cafe] Alternative to newtypes or orphan instances

[Sean Leather]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Clinton Mead wrote:

> After implementing the steps in (c), T is an instance of both C and C1,
> and both those instances define foo the same way. The only way I see a
> problem if is a module imports both C1 and C unqualified (they'll clash) but
> I see no reason to do that.
>

It's hard to respond with vague details. It may be in your case that what
you say works. But this is not true in the general case. Consider the
following simple example.

-- | A module out of your control
module A where
data T = T

-- | A module out of your control
module B where
class Show a where
  show :: a -> String
print :: Show a => a -> IO ()

-- | A module under your control
module C where
import A
import B
class Show' a where
  show' :: a -> String
instance Show' T where
  show' T = "T"

Now, you can use "show' T" anywhere you could use "show T" because the
result of both functions is the same (monomorphic) type.

But you can't use "print T" from module B because you do not have an
instance for Show of T. You could define a function "print' :: Show' a => a
-> IO ()", but you are not using the functions that rely on Show (a.k.a.
the "machinery" mentioned by Miguel). Thus, you lose out on the common
functionality that presumably exists for Show.

Regards,
Sean
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20150824/eed2b463/attachment.html>