Am Mittwoch, 23. April 2008 06:18 schrieb John Meacham:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:33:53AM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Is this the most up-to-date description of the proposal? http://repetae.net/recent/out/classalias.html
There were a few changes proposed in the discussion that followed my announcement that I wanted to make. The one I can remember now is getting rid of the 'alias' keyword since the equals sign unabiguously identifies it as an alias. I will dig through the archive to find the others..
I've just had another look, which threw up quite a few questions in my mind. I wonder what would be a good list to discuss it. Maybe this one is not bad, because it has people interested in Haskell innovation, regardless of whether it's a live Haskell' candidate?
Sounds good to me.
John
By the way, what are your current thoughts about your supertyping proposal. At least, on http://repetae.net/recent/out/supertyping.html you say:
This functionality becomes even more necessary when faced with binary-only libraries and standard language features which cannot be easily rewritten or overridden without great effort.
This seems to be an advantage compared to the class alias library. On the other hand, it looks a bit weird to me that you can express a class relation in two different ways: A t => B t and B t <= A t. Best wishes, Wolfgang