This problem with scala typeclasses really feels to me like we need to be looking at language level solutions.https://twitter.com/typelevel/status/781877858901819392 …
-
-
Replying to @posco
I'm not sure: I think that'd either lose some useful functionality of implicits, or be the same with slightly different tradeoffs...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @propensive
I don't mean get rid of implicit in scala, just add an explicit typeclass mechanism.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @posco
Syntactic sugar for common cases might work for me, as with implicit classes for ext methods. Is that roughly what you were thinking?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @propensive @posco
e.g. making something like Simulacrum first-class in Scala.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @propensive @posco
I'd love to have global vs value based instances options and good compiler error reporting for missing instances.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @raulraja @propensive
yes, either global uniqueness or some simplified resolution rules for typeclasses that could sidestep the problems.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Yep, it's currently too hard for most people... not sure we can improve simple cases without complicating others, though.
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.