> it might be wise to see what GHC decides to do on that front, first,<div><br></div><div>I'd argue that it's not. Haskell hasn't had a release in years, and I think it's time to put a little pressure on the community.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Ben Millwood <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:haskell@benmachine.co.uk" target="_blank">haskell@benmachine.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Ian Lynagh <<a href="mailto:igloo@earth.li">igloo@earth.li</a>> wrote:<br>
> [...] adding DeriveDataTypeable<br>
> hopefully wouldn't be too controversial [...]<br>
<br>
This is a little tricky since the Data class itself makes (essential,<br>
I think) use of Rank2Types. Typeable ought to be fine, but it might be<br>
wise to see what GHC decides to do on that front, first, e.g. whether<br>
it's going to autoderive all instances or forbid user instances or<br>
anything else similarly bold.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-prime mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Haskell-prime@haskell.org">Haskell-prime@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>