Deriving Typeable instances
Simon Peyton-Jones
simonpj at microsoft.com
Wed Aug 10 06:32:11 EDT 2005
Yes, you could I suppose. But then there'd be a different peculiar
change in behaviour at arity 7. I'm not sure that'd be an advantage.
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Simon Marlow
| Sent: 10 August 2005 10:58
| To: Simon Peyton-Jones; Frank Huch; glasgow-haskell-bugs at haskell.org
| Subject: RE: Deriving Typeable instances
|
| On 09 August 2005 17:16, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
|
| > I'm not against this, although you can work around the problem by
| > adding a library that defines the missing type classes (Typeable8,
| > Typeable9 etc), and making your compiler generate the instance
| > itself. There is nothing magic about 'deriving'; it's just
| > convenient.
|
| If the arity is >7, couldn't we just generate a Typeable instance,
rather than the TypeableN instance?
| It would mean you wouldn't get the benefits of TypeableN, but at least
you'd have Typeable.
|
| Cheers,
| Simon
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-bugs
mailing list