<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=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 15, 2020, at 3:27 PM, Simon Marlow <<a href="mailto:marlowsd@gmail.com" class="">marlowsd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">If I recall correctly, it was Richard who argued for NamedWildCards without PartialTypeSignatures (or independently of it), somewhere deep in one of these email threads :)</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Yes. I think it's useful to be able to write blanks in types to get informative diagnostics from GHC. But I'm not yet convinced that we should encourage users to do this routinely (which is what enabling -XPartialTypeSignatures by default would mean). NamedWildCards increases the usefulness of writing blanks in types to get useful diagnostics by being able to name the blanks (great on its own) and express that two blanks should be the same.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Richard</div></body></html>