PolyKinds, Control.Category and GHC 7.6.1

[Edward Kmett]

+1 from me.

I've pretty much abandoned all work on anything that descends from
Control.Category in the absence of this for the last year and have just
been using homegrown classes, which isn't a very satisfying solution.


On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Austin Seipp <aseipp at pobox.com> wrote:

> I presume people are still interested in this. I actually just ran
> into Category's non poly-kinded-ness the other day (while attempting
> to make a Category instance for promoted pairs) and found this email
> in my history.
>
> Can we schedule this for 7.8.1? There's -plenty- of time, and the
> addendum to Control.Category that Edward posted originally is pretty
> much all that is needed. If that sounds OK, I can post a patch for
> review or commit it directly to base.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 6:14 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
> <simonpj at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > | FWIW PolyKinds in 7.4 is rough, and I had experiences where enabling it
> > | led to compile failures in downstream modules, so this wouldn't
> > | necessarily have been painless. Hopefully with 7.6 it will be.
> >
> > PolyKinds is not an advertised feature of 7.4, so you should absolutely
> not rely on it working in 7.4.  But it IS an advertised feature for 7.6 and
> should work flawlessly.  (If not, yell.)
> >
> > Simon
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> > Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Austin - PGP: 4096R/0x91384671
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20130516/f7adee41/attachment-0001.htm>