Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I think the Haskell example should've used this type signature instead. Compared to the OP's example, this has a much stronger implication. There's very few implementations of this type that would make sense, whereas with the other one - it could be 'count' of the number of times 'string' shows up in the map; Or it could be number of letters in the provided string (ignoring the map entirely); Or it could be (key - 1); or any number of other things.

Here, you can't just magic into existence or modify an unknown 'a' value.

I think it's still pretty unclear what this function might do, since the inverse of a map isn't well-defined. I think this is a type signature that makes sense and has a fairly obvious most-likely meaning:

    boo :: Map a b -> b -> Set a
I'm not sure how you would conjure up just an 'a' in general.


You also need an Ord or at least an Eq constraint on the b's.


Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact