5 ms·
In what language do you not have to implement a conversion-to-string for each type? It's not like the compiler can know what string representation you have in m
by lutorm 13y ago
In what language do you not have to implement a conversion-to-string for each type? It's not like the compiler can know what string representation you have in mind for some arbitrary object.
- mightybyte 13y agoHaskell. It's often not about a specific representation, but rather just some representation that allows you to see a type's internals.
- mercurial 13y agoFor debug purpose (like you'd use Show in Haskell), Perl gives use Data::Dumper to dump your data structures. Not quite the same as deriving Show, but for most purposes, entirely sufficient.