Storable instance of () is broken

[Sven Panne]

Am Mi., 5. Jan. 2022 um 13:11 Uhr schrieb Harendra Kumar <
harendra.kumar at gmail.com>:

> [...] In my opinion, the right thing here is to have uniform
> semantics with a non-zero size for objects that are stored or
> retrieved from memory.


Which way is more uniform seems to depend on your POV, and base's choice
has been made a long time ago, so that ship has sailed...


> If I were the owner of the base package I would do that.


Then I'm quite happy that you aren't. ;-) API breakages should have a
*very* good reason, not just that it makes life easier for a single library.


> This optimization in my opinion is a micro-optimization which
> is irrelevant in the larger scheme of things. If someone wants to
> optimise for this case there could be ways to do that. But again it is
> subjective - this vs that.
>

IIRC there were no deep thoughts or arguments about optimizations at all at
that time, but I still find the Storable () instance OK in its current
state today.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20220105/7cb652fd/attachment.html>