
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">This proposal (<a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/80" class="">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/80</a>) introduces type-level type applications, extending the existing TypeApplications syntax to work in types.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- With -XTypeApplications, you will be able to instantiate kind variables in types. For example, you could talk about `Proxy @(Type -> Type) Maybe` and `Category @(TYPE IntRep) (->)` or even `(->) @(TYPE LiftedRep) @(TYPE DoubleRep)`.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And that's it! GHC *already* has the required/specified/inferred distinction in terms, which is unchanged in types.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I believe strongly we should accept. There was no substantive dissenting commentary, just clarifying questions.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks,</div><div class="">Richard</div></body></html>