On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 12:03 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 11/12/2010 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > For the past couple of years, I've been hearing from the PostGIS
> > people among others that our type system just isn't flexible enough
> > for their needs. It's really starting to show its age, or possibly
> > design compromises that seemed reasonable a decade or more ago, but
> > are less so now.
>
> This is so general as to be quite meaningless to me. What is it that is
> wanted that we don't have.
Some kind of generics, type generators, or type interfaces (like an
interface in Java or type class in haskell). A real subtyping system
might also be nice.
That being said, a few details are left to be decided (an
understatement).
Regards,Jeff Davis