Specific denotations for pure types

[Jon Fairbairn]

Conal Elliott <conal at conal.net> writes:
> Oh -- not one version of Int for 32-bit execution and another version for
> 64-bit execution?  Seen on #haskell today:
>
>   <mux> > maxBound :: Int
>   <lambdabot>   9223372036854775807

I've always been opposed to having Int "built in" (in
contrast to having Int32 and Int64 defined in a library
somewhere). It's much cleaner to have Integer as the
language integer. A reference implementation of Int8 (for
brevity!) could be written with (off the top of my head)

data Int8 = Int8 !Bool !Bool !Bool !Bool !Bool !Bool !Bool !Bool

which would specify the semantics exactly.

-- 
Jón Fairbairn                                 Jon.Fairbairn at cl.cam.ac.uk