Nice post on problems with type classes in Haskell: http://www.haskellforall.com/2012/05/scrap-your-type-classes.html … ... Scala has figured out the answer: implicit parameters
-
-
Replying to @dysmemic
@pelotom You do know that Haskell has implicit parameters right ? I also differ about your conclusion@debasishg2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @yoeight
@yoeight@pelotom@debasishg ick to both but give me type classes over implicit day.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@yoeight@debasishg do you disagree with Gabriel's points about the benefits of reifying constraints as values?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dysmemic
@pelotom@yoeight@debasishg I don't quite know what it means.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@yoeight@debasishg check out the article I linked1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @dysmemic
@pelotom @yoeight @debasishg I read that a long time ago. Almost perfect, but yeah, implicit is not the answer (it's worse).
5:36 PM - 24 Sep 2013
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.