Constrained Type Families?

[Evan Austin]

I unfortunately don’t have the exact code I was working on in front of me, but I was playing around with the -XTypeInType extension to see if I could use it to implement some notion of sub-kinding to start doing “Data Types a la Carte” style things at the type level.

Constrained type families seemed like the most natural way to “promote” those concepts, but maybe there’s a more obvious way I’m missing.

I’d be happy to send you a follow up email tomorrow when I’m back at the office if you think this would be a good motivating use case for the feature.


V/r,

-Evan


> On Mar 8, 2016, at 8:21 PM, Richard Eisenberg <eir at cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mar 8, 2016, at 7:17 PM, Evan Austin <e.c.austin at gmail.com <mailto:e.c.austin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> The wiki page for Phase I of Dependent Haskell describes an approach to constrained type families:
>> https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/DependentHaskell/Phase1#Typefamilyequationscanbeconstrained <https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/DependentHaskell/Phase1#Typefamilyequationscanbeconstrained>
>> 
>> Did that land in GHC 8.0 and, if so, is the updated syntax documented somewhere?
> 
> No, it didn't make it. The motivating test case seemed contrived and so we punted on this one.
> 
> Do you have a use case that really needs this feature? That would help to motivate it for 8.2 or beyond.
> 
> Thanks!
> Richard
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20160308/602dd836/attachment.html>