On 08/08/12, Ertugrul Söylemez <es@ertes.de> wrote:

> If we include super-classes would the following be an appropriate
> mathematical representation?

What is a superclass?  What are the semantics?

I assume that like a normal class a super-class *defines* a set operations for types, but it is not *a set* of types.
A sub-class can use the signature and default methods of its super-class.
I have no particular super-class in mind.
Rather I am trying to make sense of how these Haskell objects are mathematically related.

Regards,
Pat