Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-09 Thread Jacques Carette
Mike Dillon wrote: begin Ivan Lazar Miljenovic quotation: I take it you haven't had the legal problems that DrIFT had when it used to be called Derive? http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~nww/Derive/History.html Looks like they stopped selling it in June 2007, at least in the UK:

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-07 Thread Neil Mitchell
Hi Leonel, You might want to try Derive (http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/derive) if DrIFT doesn't work for you. They do roughly the same jobs, but Derive has more output formats (it can be spliced in as Template Haskell, generate #include files, output text etc) more derivations (but not quite

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-07 Thread Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Neil Mitchell ndmitch...@gmail.com writes: You might want to try Derive (http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/derive) if DrIFT doesn't work for you. They do roughly the same jobs, but Derive has more output formats (it can be spliced in as Template Haskell, generate #include files, output text

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-07 Thread Mike Dillon
begin Ivan Lazar Miljenovic quotation: Neil Mitchell ndmitch...@gmail.com writes: You might want to try Derive (http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/derive) if DrIFT doesn't work for you. They do roughly the same jobs, but Derive has more output formats (it can be spliced in as Template

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-06 Thread Ben Millwood
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Ivan Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote: Re-CC'ing -cafe: On 6 May 2010 12:54, Leonel Fonseca leone...@gmail.com wrote: I wasn't aware of GeneralizedNewtypeDeriving.  I just edited the source file Language.Haskell.TH.Syntax and left: newtype Q a = Q

[Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-05 Thread Leonel Fonseca
Hi everybody, Is it reasonable to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q? In case you wonder why I want to do that, it is because I've constructed a Q [Dec] inside a monad, I want to extract it from the monad (via runIO) and the monad has constraint Typeable over this parameter. I've also tried to

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-05 Thread Ivan Miljenovic
On 6 May 2010 02:17, Leonel Fonseca leone...@gmail.com wrote: Is it reasonable to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q? With GeneralizedNewtypeDeriving you mean? If so, then I don't see why it would be a problem. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Would it be evil to add deriving Typeable to newtype Q?

2010-05-05 Thread Ivan Miljenovic
Re-CC'ing -cafe: On 6 May 2010 12:54, Leonel Fonseca leone...@gmail.com wrote: I wasn't aware of GeneralizedNewtypeDeriving.  I just edited the source file Language.Haskell.TH.Syntax and left: newtype Q a = Q { unQ :: forall m. Quasi m = m a }    deriving Typeable Hang on, is Q something