I have nothing against this. If the unboxed types are a problem for the automatic Generic derivation, a manual instance could be written instead.
Cheers, Pedro On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Alan & Kim Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: > At the moment every part of the GHC AST derives instances of Data and > Typeable. > > There are no instances of Generic. > > If I try to standalone derive these, the derivation eventually fails for > > deriving instance Generic (Name) > > because the constructors are not all in scope. > > So, does it make sense in GHC to at least derive Generic for the items > that are opaque, and at most to do so for the whole AST. > > I know there were some concerns earlier about too many instances being > derived, and its impact on compilation time and memory, so the minimal > version may be best. > > This will allow the new generation libraries built around Generics to > perform on GHC data structures too. > > Alan > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
