> On 18 Sep 2021, at 04:29, Anthony Clayden <anthony.d.clay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "InstanceSigs is a mis-feature. Don't use it. It is less confusing to just 
> give no signature at all. If you really, really want to bind tyvars, use 
> PatternSignatures."

I would strongly disagree with this statement. I think instance signatures are 
a perfectly fine feature for the very simple case of "I want type signatures on 
my bindings, because I've got better stuff to do than memorising signatures or 
doing type inference in my head."

Does that mean they are superfluous, as your initial email suggests? Well, 
kinda, in the same way that "adding type signatures to top level bindings" is 
*technically* superfluous, but I still have those on all my top level bindings.

Characterising the extension as a miss-feature in the user guide seems weird 
for a perfectly usable and useful extension.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list

Reply via email to