Injective type families

[Richard Eisenberg]

I'm joining this conversation late, but I favor TypeFamilyDependencies over InjectiveTypeFamilies. We use the annotations for things other than injectivity! For example,

> type family Plus a b = r | r a -> b, r b -> a

is not injective under any common understanding of the word. And the argument-to-argument dependencies Simon has been musing about are even further from the meaning of "injective".

Richard

On Jan 8, 2016, at 6:43 AM, Jan Stolarek <jan.stolarek at p.lodz.pl> wrote:

>> Is "InjectiveTypeFamilies" a good name for this?  Or "TypeFamilyDependencies"?  Or what?
> My vote for "InjectiveTypeFamilies".
> 
> Janek
> 
> ---
> Politechnika Łódzka
> Lodz University of Technology
> 
> Treść tej wiadomości zawiera informacje przeznaczone tylko dla adresata.
> Jeżeli nie jesteście Państwo jej adresatem, bądź otrzymaliście ją przez pomyłkę
> prosimy o powiadomienie o tym nadawcy oraz trwałe jej usunięcie.
> 
> This email contains information intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed.
> If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this message in error,
> please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>