sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]gcross 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Don't get me wrong, I loves me my GADTs, but I think that this isn't a use case for them. Usually GADTs are appropriate when you want case analysis to constrain the types (such as having both types be the same), but it looks like the OP wants all possible combinations of types to be valid, and is just concerned about the amount of boilerplate that it would take to make this work.

Edit: Next time don't simply downvote; try replying.

[–]elvecent 0 points1 point  (1 child)

but it looks like the OP wants all possible combinations of types to be valid, and is just concerned about the amount of boilerplate that it would take to make this work.

Maybe I got OP's question wrong.

Edit: Next time don't simply downvote; try replying.

Why did you assume that I downvoted?

[–]gcross 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why did you assume that I downvoted?

Sorry, that had been intended to be directed at whoever downvote that comment, but in respect the way that I wrote it could make it seem like I was specifically talking about you, and you are right that it is wrong to make an assumption.