> Even if you were to erroneously say that, it isn't type classes that is the problem. I'm pretty sure it is. For example, see section 3.7 of "Type classes: an

> Even if you were to erroneously say that, it isn't type classes that is the problem. I'm pretty sure it is. For example, see section 3.7 of "Type classes: an exploration of the design space" by SPJ et al.