Generic instances for GHC AST

[Alan & Kim Zimmerman]

Hi Pedro

That makes sense. I hit a mental block as to how to turn the generic
representation back into the original type, but obviously if you know what
you want to turn it into, the type-specific instance will be used.

Alan

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:58 AM, José Pedro Magalhães <dreixel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have nothing against this.
>
> If the unboxed types are a problem for the automatic Generic derivation, a
> manual instance could be written instead.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Pedro
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Alan & Kim Zimmerman <alan.zimm at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> At the moment every part of the GHC AST derives instances of Data and
>> Typeable.
>>
>> There are no instances of Generic.
>>
>> If I try to standalone derive these, the derivation eventually fails for
>>
>>     deriving instance Generic (Name)
>>
>> because the constructors are not all in scope.
>>
>> So, does it make sense in GHC to at least derive Generic for the items
>> that are opaque, and at most to do so for the whole AST.
>>
>> I know there were some concerns earlier about too many instances being
>> derived, and its impact on compilation time and memory, so the minimal
>> version may be best.
>>
>> This will allow the new generation libraries built around Generics to
>> perform on GHC data structures too.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20150206/76726106/attachment.html>