Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 667141
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T23:53:44+00:00 2026-05-13T23:53:44+00:00

I want to redefine several arithmetic operators in Haskell in order to make them

  • 0

I want to redefine several arithmetic operators in Haskell in order to make them more extensible and generic.

E.g.

class Mul a b c | a b -> c where
    (*) :: a -> b -> c

This seems to work in combination with

import Prelude hiding ((*))

hiding the standard * operator. But of course all usual multiplications have to work as well, so I’d have to define something like

instance (Num t) => Mul t t t where
    (*) = ??

How can I access the original * operator (Prelude.(*) doesn’t work) here and how do I have to define the instance type such that 1 * 1 doesn’t conflict with the Monomorpism Restriction?


Edit –

import qualified

is a good tip, thanks.

But unfortunately this forced me to bring all standard methods into scope explicitly. I just want to have the possibility of redefining certain bindings leaving the rest unchanged.

So is there a combination of both? Something like

import Prelude qualified ((*))
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 4 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T23:53:45+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 11:53 pm

    Answering the edited question:

    You can do

    import Prelude hiding ((*))
    import qualified Prelude as P
    

    to gain access to all Prelude functions except (*) in the usual way and to (*) via the P prefix:

    x = 5 + 3   -- works
    y = 5 P.* 3 -- works
    z = 5 * 3   -- complains about * not being in scope
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

If I want to resubmit changes, do I have to redefine them after making
How do I redefine a class method in ruby? say, for example, I want
I derived from QLabel class. I want to redefine some events(e.g. mousePressEvent and paintEvent).
I want to implement the strict folding functions myself, from within Haskell: Is this
i want to redefine an event, i mean, i have this: boton.Click += infoApp;
I want to redefine the required attribute for a field in a clean method
I want to redefine the \part* command so that it automatically adds a contents
I want to redefine an (default) implementation in a given windsor-container. Is that what
I want to call a redefined private method from an abstract parent class. I
Want to do this: (EDIT: bad sample code, ignore and skip below) struct RECORD

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.