String literals

[Lennart Augustsson]

I've certainly considered type ambiguity, but I don't know how bad it  
will be in practice.
My small experiments indicate that things would work well.

As for IsChar, the intention of that class is to have just one  
instance.  The only reason for introducing it is to keep the instance  
declaration of IsString conforming to Haskell-98.

	-- Lennart

On Nov 14, 2006, at 20:02 , Ashley Yakeley wrote:

> As long as no-one is tempted to create "instance IsChar Word8",  
> I'll be happy.
>
> Have you considered possible type ambiguity issues? There may be a  
> case for generalising "++" to the Monoid class, but that might not  
> work well with this.
>
> -- Ashley Yakeley
>
> Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>> There will never be any implicit conversion.  Any overloading you  
>> create will have to decide how to treat the [Char].
>>     -- Lennart
>> On Nov 14, 2006, at 17:42 , Ashley Yakeley wrote:
>>> Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>>>> I think it's time that string literals got overloaded just like  
>>>> numeric literals.
>>>
>>> I'm suspicious, but as long as a Char is never ever implicitly  
>>> coverted to an integer type such as Word8, I suppose it might be OK.
>>>
>>> I will rant about this on request.
>>>
>>> --Ashley Yakeley
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Haskell-prime mailing list
>>> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime