:t runMemLog (runTransitionT $ demo 1)
runMemLog (runTransitionT $ demo 1)
:: MonadLog (MemLog a) () => Log a -> ((), [Command ()])
That means, that "foo", if you manage to compile it, would have type MonadLog (MemLog a) () => ((), [Command ()]). That means that in each call for foo it would be used as something of the type ((), [Command ()]), therefore giving no indication of which "a" should be used. The fact that there is only one instance of MonadLog (MemLog a) () - namely, the one with a = () - doesn't matter, as there could be others in the future. That's why GHC is complaining.
So, you have to provide such indication by youself, replacing IntMap.empty with (IntMap.empty :: Log ()).
20.05.2013, 15:36, "Nicolas Trangez"
All,
Since I'm stuck on a coding problem and can't figure out how to proceed, I decided to call for help.
I'm unable to get some code to typecheck, so maybe I'm missing something obvious on the implementation side, or more likely the design is completely wrong.
Here's the idea: I have some code which uses some log of "Entry a" values (for some polymorphic type 'a'), and provides actions which output "Command a" values which should be interpreted by some wrapper code, e.g. adding some new entries to the log. These actions are implemented in a custom WriterT transformer (in this demo code, the original is more complex) to output Commands, while the inner monad should give access to the log entries (this could be in-memory like in the example, or stored on disk so using IO).
You can find a trimmed-down version at https://gist.github.com/NicolasT/4230251f4f87f110d197
This doesn't type-check, and I'm not sure how to proceed. Am I taking a wrong approach? Do I need a different design?
Thanks,
Nicolas
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe