This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C6A6.F89D62D0 Content-Type: text/plain Bernie, Brian, Bernie wrote: "I don't remember whether Clean has a similar construct to Haskell 98's newtype but I would be surprised if it didn't. Perhaps if it is not there it could be simulated with strictness annotations on ordinary algebraic type declarations." Brian wrote: "It was for exactly this reason that I asked some similar questions last summer, under the subject of Re: More translation questions (Was Re: [clean-list] translation of Haskell newtype?) Here is John's helpful reply: ..." Thanks very much for showing me the existing solution for my 'new' problem. I vaguely knew Haskell had the notion represented by newtypes; I just never knew it went by that name. (The name misled me as it just seems to be a macro for an existing type, but that is another matter.) I still hope the Clean-team will once provide a decent solution, so we don't need to rework our code to use this. Regards Erik Zuurbier ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C6A6.F89D62D0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">Re: Synonym types as instances Bernie, Brian,
Bernie wrote:
"I don't remember whether Clean has a similar construct to = Haskell 98's newtype but I would be surprised if it didn't. Perhaps if = it is not there it could be simulated with strictness annotations on = ordinary algebraic type declarations."Brian wrote:
"It was for exactly this reason that I asked some similar = questions last summer, under the subject of Re: More translation = questions (Was Re: [clean-list] translation of Haskell newtype?) Here = is John's helpful reply: ..."Thanks very much for showing me the = existing solution for my 'new' problem. I vaguely knew Haskell had the = notion represented by newtypes; I just never knew it went by that name. = (The name misled me as it just seems to be a macro for an existing = type, but that is another matter.) I still hope the Clean-team will = once provide a decent solution, so we don't need to rework our code to = use this.
Regards Erik Zuurbier
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C6A6.F89D62D0--