roma at ro-che.info
Mon Jan 14 22:45:27 CET 2013
* Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com> [2013-01-14 13:32:54-0800]
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
> <simonpj at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Have you considered the effect on types like Data.Set that use the
> > uniqueness of typeclass instances to maintain invariants? e.g. even when we
> > have "newtype X = X Y" coercing "Set X" to "Set Y" can produce a tree with
> > the wrong shape for the Ord instance of Y.
> > Good point. I should add this. The wrapper should only work if the relevant
> > data constructors are in scope; rather like GHC’s existing auto-unwrapping
> > on foreign calls
> > (http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/ffi.html#ffi-newtype-io)
> I don't follow. Are you saying that adding an import, even if nothing
> from that import is used, can effect if the program compiles?
> Does that mean if we ever add Data.Map.Internal that exposes the data
> constructors to users who "know what they're doing" (i.e. are willing
> to take it upon themselves to maintain the invariants) then code that
> used to compile will stop to do so?
Now I don't follow you. Why will it stop compiling?
If you define wrappers/unwrappers involving Data.Map, then they will
compile if Data.Map.Internal is imported and will not compile if it isn't.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users