MPTCs and functional dependencies
ijones at galois.com
Tue Mar 28 13:26:31 EST 2006
On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 14:32 +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> My current take, FWIW.
> * MPTCs are very useful. They came along very rapidly (well before
> H98). I think we must put them in H'
> * But MPTCs are hamstrung without FDs or ATs
> * FDs and ATs are of the same order of technical difficulty, as Martin
> * ATs are (I believe) a bit weaker from the expressiveness point of view
> (zip example), but are (I believe) nicer to program with.
> * BUT we have way more experience with actually programming with FDs.
> ATs fail the "well-established" test by a mile.
> * Largely due to Martin's work, we now have a much better handle on just
> what restrictions on FDs make type inference tractable. So I believe
> there is a solid MPTC+FD story that we could embody in H'.
> * Medium term, I think ATs may *at the programming-language level*
> displace FDs, because they are nicer to program with. But that's just
> my opinion, and we don't have enough experience to know one way or the
This analysis is similar to what I have here:
Could someone flesh out the wiki w/ Simon's data and links to the new
information from Martin?
More information about the Haskell-prime