[Haskell] Applicative translucent functors in Haskell

Tomasz Zielonka t.zielonka at students.mimuw.edu.pl
Wed Sep 8 13:46:55 EDT 2004

On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 04:27:23PM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:

> The ML orthodoxy says that it's essential to give sharing constraints by
> name, not by position.  If every module must be parameterised by every
> type it may wish to share, modules might get a tremendous number of type
> parameters, and matching them by position isn't robust. I think that
> would be the primary criticism from a programming point of view.  I have
> no experience of how difficult this would turn out to be in practice.

How about named fields in type constructors? Something like Haskell's
records but at type level. Seems like a fun extension ;)

Best regards,

.signature: Too many levels of symbolic links

More information about the Haskell mailing list