Am Freitag, den 06.10.2006, 09:28 +0100 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones: > | Good points. The only remaining argument that I can see is then that > | it would make Greg Fitzgerald's suggestion to allow this: > | > | deriving Data, Typable for Person, Team, Department, Company > | > | difficult to do as far as I can see. Though we could still allow > | multiple derivings in one declaration, just not the cartesian product > | version above: > | > | deriving Data Person, Typeable Person, Data Team, Typeable Team > | deriving Data Department, Typeable Department, Data Company, Typeable > | Company > > Yes, I'd be happy with requiring the programmer to enumerate the > instances s/he wants, rather than having an implicit Cartesian product.
I agree. It is more important to get the orthogonality from having one construct subsume another than the cartesian product thing, which may be cute, but I don't think all that frequently useful. Manuel _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
