Yeah, I should clarify, this quote came up in relation to ATs, which are designed speifically to make type programming easier (unlike MPTCs and FDs, where it was an Olegian accident) lennart:
No, Haskell wasn't designed with type level programming in mind. In fact it took a few years before any serious type level programming was done. And lo and behold, the type level has an untyped logic language.
-- Lennart
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Ben Franksen <[1]ben.franksen@online.de> wrote:
Don Stewart wrote: > As Manuel says, in C++ type level programming was an accident, in > Haskell, it was by design.
Was it, really? I was laways under teh impression that Oleg-style type system tricks were not in the least anticipated back when Haskell acquired type classes...
Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [2]Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org [3]http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
References
Visible links 1. mailto:ben.franksen@online.de 2. mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org 3. http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe