[m-dev.] io__write and arrays
David Glen JEFFERY
dgj at cs.mu.oz.au
Tue Apr 8 16:31:27 AEST 1997
Peter Schachte wrote:
> > The downside is that a declaration would be required for each type that you
> > want to be able to print. Perhaps a mechanism which says `Everything is
> > in this class. Here's the default definition which can be overriden'
> > would be nice. (?)
> Why not go a step further: any type class which has defaults for all
> (what are they called?) type class parametric predicates/functions
> automatically applies to all types? Can you think of a case where you
> define defaults for all <mouthfull> when you don't want that type class to
> apply to all types?
Class methods is probably the term you are looking for.
Anyhow, interesting thought. Perhaps a more general way of putting it would be:
If all class methods have default definitions and a type satisfies all the
constraints in the class's context, then a type may be considered to be a member
of the class.
Actually, I just thought of a way to achieve this, _if_ we allow overlapping
instance declarations. It goes a little bit like this...
class Printable a where
display = ...
instance Printable a
The `instance' declaration says that anything is printable (and uses the
defaults). A more specific declaration would override the defaults.
I'm still not convinced about overlapping instances, though.
> Hmmmm. Just thought of a bit of a problem here, though. What happens if
> the user declares a C type and doesn't provide a write, display or print?
> Does display then report a runtime type error when someone tries to
> display one?
At the moment, it would just print out the pointer that Mercury is hanging on
to. This is because c_pointer is (abstractly) defined as
:- type c_pointer == int.
> You'd really like to create a type class displayable that
> automatically includes all atomic Mercury terms plus Mercury terms
> composed of only displayable Mercury terms, plus any non-mercury terms
> that have a display operation (method, really). Can you do that with type
Hmmm. Maybe. It would require much greater (inbuilt) support for C types,
love and cuddles,
This .sig deliberately left blank
More information about the developers