Constructor classes (Re: [mercury-users] Question)

[Fergus Henderson]

On 24-Aug-1999, Juergen Stuber <juergen at mpi-sb.mpg.de> wrote:
> Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU> writes:
> > 
> > However, making everything implicitly curried isn't as straight-forward
> > as it sounds, I think, due to interactions with predicates and the mode
> > system.  Also it's more difficult to implement efficiently, I think.
> 
> I agree.  And as I said, I don't think it is very important;
> there are certainly a lot of more important things to do.
> The feature I personally miss most is constructor classes
> (or something equivalent).  Is anything going on in that
> direction?

No, not at the moment.  Mercury has multi-parameter type classes, and we've
recently implemented most of what is needed for existential types (basically
everything except RTTI support), but at this point we haven't done anything
with regard to constructor classes.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh at 128.250.37.3        |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-users mailing list
post:  mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------