I'm trying to build a nicer interface over the one generated by jvm-bridge. I'm using fancy type classes to remove the need to mangle method names. I would like methods to be automatcially inherited, following an inheritance hierarcy defined with another set of type classes. My basic classes look like this class HasFooMethod cls args result | cls args -> result where foo :: cls -> args -> result If I have classes A and B with foo methods like foo_JA_Jint :: ClassA -> Jint -> Bool foo_JB_Jboolean :: ClassB -> Bool -> Jint then I can make instances instance HasFooMethod ClassA Jint Bool instance HasFooMethod ClassB Bool Jint Now I can just use foo everywhere. I would like to avoid declaring an instance for every class though. In java methods are inherited from a superclass, and I would like to inherit methods automatically as well. In the bindings jvm-bridge generates a method is invoked with a function mangled after the highest ancestor that defined that particular overloading, so the implementation of HasFooMethod at a particular overloading is the same for any descendant. So I defined a class to model the inheritance relationships class SubType super sub | sub -> super where upCast :: sub -> super Now I can define a default instance of HasFooMethod: instance (HasFooMethod super args result, SubClass super sub) => HasFooMethod sub args result where foo sub args = foo (upCast sub) args This will propagate foo methods down the inheritance hierarcy. If a new class C is derived from A, I just need to say instance SubClass ClassA ClassC and ClassC gets a foo method. (In the actually code I piggy-back on a transitive subclass relation jvm-bridge defines that already includes an upcast method, so upCast has a default that should always be acceptable). The problem comes when interfaces are added to the mix. Interfaces are treated just like classes by jvm-bridge, and even though no implementation is inherited from instances in Java, the method accessors generated by jvm-bridge should be inherited. One problem is that the subclass relationship needs the functional dependency so that the default instance of HasFooMethod will respects the functional dependencies of HasFooMethod, so I can't declare subclass instances for multiple inheritance. On the other hand, if I don't use the functional dependency on HasFooMethod I end up needing to annotate most of the return values in a program. I run into similar problems trying to use numeric literals as arguments, because they are also overloaded. Does anyone know of clever solutions that would model multiple inheritance while preserving the functional dependencies (unsafe compiler flags are fine too), or ways to reduce the pain of overloading resolution without the functional dependency? One alternative is generating seperate HasFooMethod instances for every class in the system. The problem is that this would require alterating the bit of jvm-bridge that uses JNI to find information on classes, which currently only reports newly defined methods. JNI is black magic to me. Thanks Brandon