<div dir="auto">I am on board</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 13:42 Eric Seidel <<a href="mailto:eric@seidel.io">eric@seidel.io</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi everyone,<br>
<br>
This proposal[1] makes the `lift` and `liftTyped` methods of the `Lift` class levity-polymorphic, which allows us to write proper `Lift` instances for unlifted types. It would also allow GHC to remove the special logic that currently supports lifting records with unlifted fields.<br>
<br>
The main downside is the potential for breakage since `lift @Foo` would now fix the RuntimeRep parameter rather than the `a`. This is unfortunate, but I doubt it will show up much. It also unfortunately requires making both `lift` and `liftTyped` methods, when we had just decided to extract `lift` from the class. <br>
<br>
I recommend accepting the proposal.<br>
<br>
Thanks!<br>
Eric<br>
<br>
[1]: <a href="https://github.com/harpocrates/ghc-proposals/blob/levity-polymorphic-lift/proposals/0000-levity-polymorphic-lift.rst" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/harpocrates/ghc-proposals/blob/levity-polymorphic-lift/proposals/0000-levity-polymorphic-lift.rst</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div>