What is the difference in capability between the SML module system and Haskell's Type and Typeclass system? -
i'm trying understand shortcoming here. sml module system merely provide dependent types, similar how idris has extended haskell type system, or there more going on addition capability of dependent types? information on sml module system in existing internet articles has either been hard find or hard understand me.
** edit ** there confusion i'm getting @ question, , confusion seems stem confusion ml module system (i think due fact understood functors in haskell way). dependent types offered example of different between 2 type systems, turns out have been bad example since neither system supports such thing (at least not directly).
the main goal of question me determine differences in expression of concepts between ml , haskell type systems. abstractions/concepts cannot represented in 1 can in another? why claim ml's typesystem more modern/powerful haskell's, or vice versa. way think of 1 type system lacking other not?
the reason i'm interested in knowing due interest in architecting software systems , how different type systems make modularity , extensibility of software easier or more difficult. i've been unimpressed object oriented type systems imperative languages, i'm branching out , studying offered ml , haskell first ones interested me.
limp_chimp answered question providing paper available on web gives pretty detailed comparison between haskell , ml type systems examples.
Comments
Post a Comment