Re: [GHC] #7492: Generic1 deriving: Can we replace Rec1 f with f :.: Par1?

2012-12-10 Thread GHC
#7492: Generic1 deriving: Can we replace Rec1 f with f :.: Par1?
-+--
Reporter:  spl   |   Owner:  dreixel 
Type:  feature request   |  Status:  new 
Priority:  normal|   Milestone:  
   Component:  Compiler  | Version:  7.7 
Keywords:|  Os:  Unknown/Multiple
Architecture:  Unknown/Multiple  | Failure:  None/Unknown
  Difficulty:  Unknown   |Testcase:  
   Blockedby:|Blocking:  
 Related:|  
-+--
Changes (by simonpj):

  * difficulty:  = Unknown
  * owner:  = dreixel


-- 
Ticket URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7492#comment:1
GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/
The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

___
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-bugs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs


Re: [GHC] #7492: Generic1 deriving: Can we replace Rec1 f with f :.: Par1?

2012-12-10 Thread GHC
#7492: Generic1 deriving: Can we replace Rec1 f with f :.: Par1?
-+--
Reporter:  spl   |   Owner:  dreixel 
Type:  feature request   |  Status:  new 
Priority:  normal|   Milestone:  
   Component:  Compiler  | Version:  7.7 
Keywords:|  Os:  Unknown/Multiple
Architecture:  Unknown/Multiple  | Failure:  None/Unknown
  Difficulty:  Unknown   |Testcase:  
   Blockedby:|Blocking:  
 Related:|  
-+--

Comment(by dreixel):

 You raise an interesting point, thanks. I think replacing `Rec1 f` with `f
 :.: Par1` would be possible. But I'm not too keen on making a change to
 the representation right now, as I think there might be more fundamental
 changes coming up anyway (e.g. making use of `DataKinds`). But I'm leaving
 this open so that we don't forget the idea.

-- 
Ticket URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7492#comment:2
GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/
The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

___
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-bugs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs