>> 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
|