Proposal: Applicative => Monad: Call for consensus
lemming at henning-thielemann.de
Mon Jan 17 01:25:17 CET 2011
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, wren ng thornton wrote:
> On 1/16/11 12:43 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
>> Maciej Piechotka schrieb:
>>> I agree that there are advantages of both ways and they are perfectly
>>> compatible with each other. While I don't know about GHC internals I'd
>>> assume that class v-tables (term borrowed from C++ I'm not sure about
>>> Haskell terminology) is per-class and not copied for each function
>> "Method dictionary"
> Perhaps I missed it, but I don't see anything in that page clarifying whether
> the actual underlying table is shared (i.e., the dictionary is just a pointer
> to a global table) or not (i.e., the dictionary is a constructed copy of the
> table). As far as the surface language is concerned the distinction doesn't
> matter, but as far as people worrying about performance considerations due to
> the size of dictionaries it does.
Sorry, I just wanted to answer the question how these class v-tables are
called in Haskell.
More information about the Libraries