|
|
|
|
|
|
by tome
3778 days ago
|
|
|
Ha, sorry, didn't mean to make it sound like I was talking about anything in particular! I just made up that example on the spot. A "Renderable" thing fits into a common pattern where you see typeclasses used in this way. (Are you talking about this library?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/renderable-0.1.0.0/docs/... I don't actually see a Renderable class there anyway.) |
|
|
Yes, there's no 'Renderable' typeclass but there are 'Primitive's. There are no laws that the 'Primitive' typeclass instances must obey but there are associated types that need to be satisfied. I tried to write this without a typeclass and I just couldn't get it to check, so I turned to TypeFamilies to encode the relation ship between types. I'd love to make it more idiomatic though!
[I'd love some feedback if you're so inclined](https://github.com/schell/renderable/blob/master/src/Data/Re...)