<div dir="ltr">Agreed.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 23 February 2018 at 20:32, Richard Eisenberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rae@cs.brynmawr.edu" target="_blank">rae@cs.brynmawr.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">This proposal (<a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/80" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-<wbr>proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/<wbr>80</a>) introduces type-level type applications, extending the existing TypeApplications syntax to work in types.<div><br></div><div>- 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><br></div><div>And that's it! GHC *already* has the required/specified/inferred distinction in terms, which is unchanged in types.</div><div><br></div><div>I believe strongly we should accept. There was no substantive dissenting commentary, just clarifying questions.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Richard</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org">ghc-steering-committee@<wbr>haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-<wbr>steering-committee</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>