Conversation
I mean nothing too profound -- type classes tie "laws" to type-directed implicit arguments in a way that mystifies the two distinct concepts
2
4
in ML signatures specify an interface -- over both types and values -- and you can associate laws with the signature. much neater imo!
2
1
11
Tbh part of me regrets not having a sufficiently-strong set of counterarguments ready at the time, against the push for traits in Rust.
2
5
We started with a (very poorly implemented) first-class module system, bolted on a very dynamic object system, then deleted both for traits.
2
1
1
yeah missed opportunity to reintroduce people to ML-style module sigs in Rust as "C header files done right" haha
1
5
was thinking about this recently actually.. ML functors seem like they'd go very well in a bit lower-level "safe C" (rather than "safe C++")
1
2
with manual instantiation to make monomorphization only-on-request and explicit, and polymorphism-through-pointers otherwise (just like C)
2
2
No more bifurcated languages please. Gimme a unified language with the ability to use records as interfaces efficiently! 😖
1
yeah I've been thinking about one of those too, for a pretty long time now :P (if I get your meaning correctly)
3
Been trying to shepherd Gluon in that direction at least…