From: Brian McNamara (lorgon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-14 17:00:54
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:38:15AM -1000, David Abrahams wrote:
> Brian McNamara <lorgon_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > -- istream_iterator models InputIterator
> > instance InputIterator (istream_iterator t d) t d where
> > ...
> istream_iterator isn't parameterized on its distance_type, which I
> think is part of the point I am making.
The top of
suggests otherwise; I was just copying that.
> Sure. My point was that, IIUC, you can't declare the InputIterator
> type class in Haskell such that, in addition to being able to write:
> instance InputIterator (istream_iterator t d) t d where
> you can write something like:
> instance InputIterator (istream_iterator t) where
> and have the InputIterator look inside istream_iterator for its nested
> value_type and distance_type.
I think from the Haskell point-of-view, the first declaration does
exactly that. That is,
instance InputIterator (istream_iterator t d) t d where
means the same as (inventing new syntax on-the-fly to communicate the
instance InputIterator istream_iterator
(The former just uses pattern matching to name the components, whereas
the latter uses a "nesting" syntax.)
In any case,
> Check out http://tinyurl.com/v1k6 and get back to me ;^) You might
Thanks much for this reference! (I would have discovered it on my own
soon when I looked at my copy of the OOPSLA proceedings, but "now" is
better than "soon". :) ) Looks very cool.
> want to ask the authors what they mean what they say:
> With respect to generics, ML and Haskell provide an informative
> contrast to the object-oriented languages... The discussions of Java
> generics, Generic C#, and Eiffel suggest that Haskell and ML avoid
> some difficulties with implementing generic libraries that the
> object-oriented languages share... Both languages have
> disadvantages. ML lacks functions with constrained genericity aside
> from functions nested within functors. Haskell, though quite
> expressive, requires an awkward mechanism to express associated
I have only glanced at it so far to get a feel for their example. It
may well be that there I've missed which makes it harder/more-awkward/
less-scalable/something than I have thought. Or maybe it's just a case
of "feels awkward" being relative to the language background one is
In any case, thanks again for this pointer; I am thrilled to see a paper
on this topic, especially when it's authored by "all the right people".
-- -Brian McNamara (lorgon_at_[hidden])
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk