Am Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2008 18:48 schrieb Scott Dillard:

Hi,

I'm trying to extended the standard unboxed array types and array classes to my own product types, for now let's just say (,). So if the proper MArray and IArray instances exist for e and f, then I can make an instance for (e,f). The actual type of that array, something like (UArray i e, UArray i f), would be given by an associated type. This is how the uvector library does it, but that library defines its own array primitives and classes. I'd like to reuse the standard ones if possible.

The problem I keep running into is the kind of the array, * -> * -> *, or 'a i e'. The crucial type there is e, which is used to dispatch the instance to the proper associated type, so if e = (a,b) then the array type would be (UArray i a, UArray I b), and if e is (a,b,c) then (UArray i a, UArray i b, UArray i c). If IArray was instead expecting the array type to be 'a e i' I could maybe do something like this:

class UArrClass e where data UArr e :: * -> * instance (IArray UArray e, IArray UArray f) => UArrClass (e,f) where data UArr (e,f) i = UArrPair (UArray i e) (UArray i f)

But as it stands, I can't do that. The 'i' type parameter has to be bound as a parameter of UArrClass. So instead I tried this.

class UArrClass i e where data UArr i e unsafeAt_ :: UArr i e -> Int -> e --mirror all IArray methods

Perhaps class (Ix i) => UArrClass i e where ... would work?

instance ( IArray UArray e , IArray UArray f , Ix i --needed for unsafeAt ) => UArrClass i (e,f) where newtype UArr i (e,f) = UArrPair (UArray i e) (UArray i f) unsafeAt_ (UArrPair ea fa) i = (unsafeAt ea i , unsafeAt fa i)

and then the instance for IArray could be defined as follows, just a mapping from the methods of that class onto my own:

instance ( IArray UArray e , IArray UArray f , UArrClass i (e,f) ) => IArray UArr (e,f) where unsafeAt = unsafeAt_

The problem I get now is from the 'Ix i' context of the IArray methods. The 'i' there is only mentioned in the context of the methods, not the class, so I have no 'handle' onto that 'i' that I can use to explicitly unify it with the 'i' mentioned in UArrClass. The compiler keeps complaining about rigid type variables. It would be great if I could leave that type variable unbound in my class, and only bind it in the methods, as IArray does, but as far as I can tell, I can't. I need to bind 'i' in my class because it's the first type-argument to the array type constructor, rather than the second. I don't care about the 'i', its the 'e' I'm after, but all applications of the associated type constructor need to be saturated.

Can anyone see a way to do this? I understand there's about a million other ways to accomplish what I'm trying to do without IArray and MArray, but I'm just wondering if I should abandon those classes altogether, and use my own array classes, using something like uvector or unsafeIO/ForeignPtr. That seems to be trend.

Thanks, Scott