Re: [Haskell-cafe] class instances for kinds with finite ty constrs, does this make sense?

2012-06-15 Thread Serguey Zefirov
2012/6/8 Brent Yorgey byor...@seas.upenn.edu: On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 07:32:45PM +0100, ex falso wrote: we always have to put the class restriction (TupleLength l) there, even though all possible type constructors of [*] have a TupleLength instance defined! Yes, and this is a feature, for

Re: [Haskell-cafe] class instances for kinds with finite ty constrs, does this make sense?

2012-06-08 Thread Brent Yorgey
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 07:32:45PM +0100, ex falso wrote: we always have to put the class restriction (TupleLength l) there, even though all possible type constructors of [*] have a TupleLength instance defined! Yes, and this is a feature, for at least two reasons. First: to the extent that

[Haskell-cafe] class instances for kinds with finite ty constrs, does this make sense?

2012-06-07 Thread ex falso
Hi, i've been using DataKinds for a while and there seems to be a recurring annoyance that could be possibly eliminated with a language extension. It goes something like this: data Tuple (l :: [*]) where Unit :: Tuple '[] Comma :: a - Tuple as - Tuple (a ': as) data Proxy k = Proxy class

Re: [Haskell-cafe] class instances for kinds with finite ty constrs, does this make sense?

2012-06-07 Thread José Pedro Magalhães
Hi, This has been discussed before: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Data-Kinds-and-superfluous-in-my-opinion-constraints-contexts-td5689436.html Feel free to open a feature request for this. I think it's something we should consider addressing, but at the moment it's not immediately clear