Should TH TExp be able use the Q monad

[Simon Peyton Jones]

Well, it opens up the entire issue of dependence on typechecking order and reification.  Other things being equal, simple is good...

Simon

|  -----Original Message-----
|  From: Richard Eisenberg [mailto:eir at cis.upenn.edu]
|  Sent: 18 April 2016 14:36
|  To: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
|  Cc: Boespflug, Mathieu <m at tweag.io>; mainland at drexel.edu; Manuel M T
|  Chakravarty <chak at justtesting.org>; ghc-devs <ghc-devs at haskell.org>
|  Subject: Re: Should TH TExp be able use the Q monad
|  
|  
|  On Apr 18, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
|  wrote:
|  >
|  > My instinct is to make it less expressive, though, and only allow
|  (TExp t) as the argument of $$.
|  >
|  > Does anyone care either way?   I suppose we'd better open a ticket
|  for this.
|  
|  I don't see any harm that is introduced by having access to the Q
|  monad. As you say, as long as we can create only well-typed TExps, it
|  doesn't seem to matter what information we have access to on the way.
|  In other words: what's the gain by reducing expressiveness here?
|  
|  Richard