I would argue that ML functors are significantly more general than Adapter as presented in Design Patterns, the transferable "big idea" being the underlying type theory (functors as high-kindered types) as opposed to the pattern.
> you could easily imagine a derived language where functors are just regular functions and structures are regular values
I'm pretty sure someone taught me this some time ago but I have forgotten it, can you do it that easily? Aren't you at least supposed to make a distinction about types and kinds? I really don't remember, I'm genuinely asking.
> you could easily imagine a derived language where functors are just regular functions and structures are regular values
I'm pretty sure someone taught me this some time ago but I have forgotten it, can you do it that easily? Aren't you at least supposed to make a distinction about types and kinds? I really don't remember, I'm genuinely asking.