[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,
Tom
--
.signature: Too many levels of symbolic links
More information about the Haskell
mailing list