> > You mean, if the data type being defined doesn't actually use the > > generality of GADTs, allow GADT syntax, and deriving() too? > > Yes, that would be very nice for the HaskellDemo and new users. > I'd definitely switch all of my non-GADT datatypes to use that.
One worry I have about this is that it'll introduce a new tripwire that new users will have to watch out for - if they use GADT notation for all data defintions, eventually they'll pass the threshold beyond which deriving() mysteriously doesn't work, probably without even knowing they're doing anything different. Abe _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
