terse syntax for typeclass instances
See original GitHub issueWhen creating a typeclass instance, one must do a lot of boileplate. The instance pattern is well known but still has boilerplate.
implicit val FooBar: Foo[Bar] = instance { b => ... }
It would be nice if this something like this were possible
implicit val _: Foo[Bar] = instance { b => ... }
Which is still full of boilerplate, so better suggestions would be good. The linked ticket talks about a lot of the more general cases and is worth reading.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Comments:14 (8 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Implementing, and Understanding Type Classes - okmij.org
Describing three strategies of implementing type classes, aiming to clarify their behavior.
Read more >Typeclasses — Coq 8.16.1 documentation
The syntax for class and instance declarations is the same as the record syntax of Coq: Class classname (p1 : t1) ⋯ (pn...
Read more >dnvriend/type-classes-example: A small study project ... - GitHub
The syntax to create a type class instance for 'Format' is very terse, that is because we are using a macro that has...
Read more >Haskell type class instance syntax - Stack Overflow
A Functor has to be parametrised by another type, that is it is a "type level function" that takes one "concrete type" and...
Read more >A Tutorial on Typeclasses in Coq - Software Foundations
Classes and Instances. To automate converting various kinds of data into strings, we begin by defining a typeclass called Show. Class Show A...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
I don’t think that’s intended. IMO that’s a bug. The compiler should not allow you to do that, since it is clearly violating the privateness of
object Foo
.oh, it’s IMPLICIT 😛