[Haskell-cafe] Announcing OneTuple-0.1.0

[Tim Chevalier]

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Jason Dusek <jason.dusek at gmail.com> wrote:
> Lennart Augustsson <lennart at augustsson.net> wrote:
>> But (a) is not a lifted version of a, whereas (a,b) is a lifted
>> version of the a b product.
>> So it's not consistent, and thereby wrong.
>
>  Well, we can't represent the unlifted product in Haskell,
>  right? You have to use some constructor. So if we just say we
>  are using tuples to represent unlifted products, what's so bad
>  about that?
>

Unless I'm confused, unboxed tuples represent unlifted products. In a
sense this is "[using] some constructor", but in a sense not, since an
unboxed tuple constructor has no runtime representation.

>  The last two messages in this thread suggests this has more to
>  do with the internals of Haskell than they do with consistent
>  semantics -- so I am perhaps missing the point.

I think most Haskellers try their best to keep the first subservient
to the second.

Cheers,
Tim

-- 
Tim Chevalier * http://cs.pdx.edu/~tjc * Often in error, never in doubt
"If you don't understand the causes, it is impossible to come up with
a solution." -- Joe Biden