Well, it opens up the entire issue of dependence on typechecking order and reification. Other things being equal, simple is good...
Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Richard Eisenberg [mailto:[email protected]] | Sent: 18 April 2016 14:36 | To: Simon Peyton Jones <[email protected]> | Cc: Boespflug, Mathieu <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Manuel M T | Chakravarty <[email protected]>; ghc-devs <[email protected]> | Subject: Re: Should TH TExp be able use the Q monad | | | On Apr 18, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <[email protected]> | wrote: | > | > My instinct is to make it less expressive, though, and only allow | (TExp t) as the argument of $$. | > | > Does anyone care either way? I suppose we'd better open a ticket | for this. | | I don't see any harm that is introduced by having access to the Q | monad. As you say, as long as we can create only well-typed TExps, it | doesn't seem to matter what information we have access to on the way. | In other words: what's the gain by reducing expressiveness here? | | Richard _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
