Understanding Type Classes, Scala implicit and C# -

i read blog post joe duffy haskell type classes , c# interfaces.

i'm trying understand have enabled c# have type classes, , wonder whether feature scala's implicits solve it?

having kind of feature enable writing this:

public interface ireducableof<t> {    t append(t a, t b);    t empty(); }  public t reduce(this ienumerable<t> vals, **implicit** ireducerof<t> reducer ) {   enumerable.aggregate(vals, reducer.append); } 

making sure have in our context implementation of ireducerof<t> compiler "just" pick reducer , use execute code.

of course, code cannot compile.

but questions are:

1. can enable implementing type classes?

2. is similar happening in scala?

i'm asking general understanding , not particular problem.

update

i've encountered github repo on possible implementation of type classes in c#

yes, how type classes implemented in scala. general design principle in scala add general , re-usable features language can used implement higher-level constructs library constructs, if @ possible. in particular case, type classes can implemented using objects , implicits, both objects , implicits have uses beyond merely implementing type classes, makes more sense include more general building blocks in language , allow users build higher-level constructs (like type classes) on top.

the canonical paper on implementing type classes objects , implicits aptly named type classes objects , implicits bruno c. d. s. oliveira, adriaan moors, , martin odersky. there's nice discussion of paper on lambda-the-ultimate.

note adding implicits language not enough. implement type classes way, lot of "interesting" type classes (such monad) cannot expresses in c♯: monad higher-kinded, c♯'s type system not.