El Oct 27, 2014, a las 9:57, Erik Hesselink <hessel...@gmail.com> escribió:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Daniel Trstenjak > <daniel.trsten...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> There's a little bit of bikeshedding that needs to happen (e.g. is "hiding >>> (Foo >>> (..))" sufficient to hide the type Foo and not just its constructors), but >>> are >>> people +1 on this? I've frequently wanted this behavior. >> >> I would be surprised if 'Foo(..)' would mean in this case something >> different, so yes, the type Foo should be hidden too. > > One related question: how would you export only the type if you have > > newtype Foo = Foo ... > > which is a pretty common pattern? Since "hiding (Foo(Foo))" would also > hide the type, I don't see many options, which is unfortunate. > > In general, I'm +1 on the proposal. > I'd say "hiding (Foo)" hides the type and constructor; "hiding (Foo(Foo))" hides only the constructor. Tom > Erik > _______________________________________________ > Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list > Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
