I believe, whenever this <http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/2715>
ticket is closed (with completition), we get a more general substitution to
Functional Dependencies. I hope it happens really soon, because I need it
So it's worth to prepare yourself better to Type Families.
As for deriving of fundeps, outside of Haskell I saw them already used in
methods used in a base of reasoning about RDB (relational data bases)
structures. For more on that search web by keywords "normalization rules
functional dependencies", that's an interesting subject if you possess it in
GÃnther Schmidt wrote:
> I'm wondering if there is any chance that functional dependencies will
> not be around in the future. I do not actually understand the subject
> yet as such, but I'd like to make sure before I get deeper into it that
> it's something that will be around in the time to come.
> What I understand of Haskell is that it's not so much "engineered" like
> other languages but more "derived" from Math, well the very foundations
> anyway. But some things I can not determine whether or not they are
> derived from math and thus will stay, or are engineered and might go
> away, functional dependencies for instance.
View this message in context:
Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Haskell-Cafe mailing list