>> Yeah, I was talking about *algebraic* data type when I said "all 
>> Haskell types are ADTs". ;-)
> 
> Sorry. I get them mixed up, since the definitions changed since I 
> studied them.
> 
>> I think we're still talking about two different meanings of ADT. ;-)
> 
> Possibly.

So, now do you agree that "all Haskell types are algebraic data types"? ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message