I'd prefer to use TypeFamilyDependencies right now, and keep using that same flag (not a new one) when we extend what "dependencies" means.
Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Jan Stolarek [mailto:jan.stola...@p.lodz.pl] | Sent: 12 January 2016 08:44 | To: Richard Eisenberg <e...@cis.upenn.edu> | Cc: Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com>; GHC developers <ghc- | d...@haskell.org> | Subject: Re: Injective type families | | > I'm joining this conversation late, but I favor TypeFamilyDependencies over | > InjectiveTypeFamilies. We use the annotations for things other than | > injectivity! For example, | > | > > type family Plus a b = r | r a -> b, r b -> a | > | > is not injective under any common understanding of the word. | But that is not implemented yet and thus will not make it into GHC 8.0. | Following earlier | argumentation, once we have generalized injectivity we should put it into a | separate extension. | So I'd say we stick with InjectiveTypeFamilies for currently implemented | features and put the new | ones in TypeFamilyDependencies. | | That said, I don't like the idea that every addition to a language extension | means creating a | separate language extension. | | Janek | | --- | Politechnika Łódzka | Lodz University of Technology | | Treść tej wiadomości zawiera informacje przeznaczone tylko dla adresata. | Jeżeli nie jesteście Państwo jej adresatem, bądź otrzymaliście ją przez | pomyłkę | prosimy o powiadomienie o tym nadawcy oraz trwałe jej usunięcie. | | This email contains information intended solely for the use of the individual | to whom it is addressed. | If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this message in | error, | please notify the sender and delete it from your system. _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
