Hello Dave, Saturday, February 04, 2006, 3:52:46 AM, you wrote:

...

Now i'm trying to generalize my functions parameters/results to type classes instead of single types. for example, getFileSize function can return any numeric value, be it Integer, Word or Int64. This, naturally, results in those long and awkward signatures. Allowing to write type of result as just "Integral" makes signature smaller and more understandable for me:

getFileSize :: Stream Monad h -> Monad Integral

DM> How does that type translate back into current Haskell? Assuming DM> "Stream" is a type, and not a class, I see at least three possibilities: DM> (Integral a, Monad m) => Stream m h -> m a DM> (Integral a, Monad m1, Monad m2) => Stream m1 h -> m2 a DM> (Integral a, Monad m) => (forall m. Monad m => Stream m h) -> m a first and i said that in my post. the translation includes only moving classes to the left side of "=>" and types to the right side of "=>", and using one type variable per each class name. btw, Stream is a class in my lib, so the right translation is: (Integral int, Monad m, Stream m h) => h -> m int -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:bulatz@HotPOP.com