Proposal for stand-alone deriving declarations?

[Brian Smith]

On 10/6/06, Björn Bringert <bringert at cs.chalmers.se> wrote:
>
> John Hughes wrote:
> > deriving (Eq Foo, Ord Foo)
> >
> > instead of
> >
> > deriving (Eq, Ord) for Foo
> >
> > I find the former syntax clearer and more readable, actually.
> >
> > John
>
> I'll implement this syntax instead and then write up a Haskell' proposal.


I am sure that it was already argued at great length, but I think it is
wrong to start the declaration with "deriving." I believe that "derive
instance" fits much better into the language. I understand the desire to
avoid adding new keywords but I think that something along the lines of what
was done for "for" could be done here for "derive."

Regards,
Brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/attachments/20061008/a674b62b/attachment.htm