Evaluating type expressions in GHCi

Sean Leather leather at cs.uu.nl
Wed Sep 21 12:10:01 CEST 2011

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 04:00, Brent Yorgey wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 04:29:21PM -0700, J. Garrett Morris wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> > > What should the GHCi command be *called*?
> >
> > :simplify or :simplifytype.  In GHCi at the moment, you could abbreviate
> > that as short as :si.
> IMO Simon's suggestion of something like :normalizetype or :normalize
> or :normtype would be even better -- you could abbreviate it as just
> :n .  It is also more accurate; the correct term for what the command
> should do is in fact "normalize", and it may not in fact end up making
> the type any simpler.

I like :normalize (without "type" since we don't need to distinguish it from
term normalization), and the shorthand :n is perfect. And if you prefer
:normalise, the location-agnostic :normtype, or other colors that start with
:n, I don't mind, because I'll almost never type the whole thing. ;)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20110921/314bd6e2/attachment.htm>

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list