Difference between revisions of "Talk:OOP vs type classes"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Uchchwhash (talk | contribs) m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Bulat, |
Bulat, |
||
I think existential types somehow correspond to the idea of *subtyping* (as illustrated in the [[Existential type]] page, hope you can elaborate on that. |
I think existential types somehow correspond to the idea of *subtyping* (as illustrated in the [[Existential type]] page, hope you can elaborate on that. |
||
| + | |||
| + | subtyping possible without existensuials, it's just "=>" in "class" declaration. as both me and John said, existensials just packs dictionary togehther with object what makes possible polymorphic lists and so on, i.e. using different _instances_ of the same class inside one list or other container, or in different arguments in function, [[User:Bulatz|Bulatz]] 15:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 15:14, 18 August 2006
Bulat, I think existential types somehow correspond to the idea of *subtyping* (as illustrated in the Existential type page, hope you can elaborate on that.
subtyping possible without existensuials, it's just "=>" in "class" declaration. as both me and John said, existensials just packs dictionary togehther with object what makes possible polymorphic lists and so on, i.e. using different _instances_ of the same class inside one list or other container, or in different arguments in function, Bulatz 15:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)