Re: Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

> .. :type should report the real type What about defaulting? Is it real? https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11994 - J.W. ___ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Re: Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

I agree with Iavor that :type should report the real type. I see this only stymieing and frustrating efforts to teach the language. I do like the :inst idea. > On Apr 27, 2016, at 12:22 PM, Iavor Diatchki wrote: > > Hello Richard, > > I think that `:type` should

Re: Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

Hello Richard, I think that `:type` should report the real type of an expressions (i.e., the fully generalized inferred type, just like it does now). Certainly I wouldn't want `:type` to show me some kind of (more or less) arbitrary specialization of the type. It could be useful to have a ghci

Re: Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

Speaking as someone teaching his coworkers Haskell now, Eric's is the best suggestion I've seen so far. What I like about it: * The original meaning of :type is unchanged. * No new command is added (I prefer adding a flag to adding another command). * With the flag on, the full type is shown

Re: Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

I think design A (deeply instantiate + generalize) produces the most sensible types. I don't know what the curly braces mean (perhaps that we can't use type application anymore since the order changed?) but I don't think they'd show up at all without -fprint-explicit-foralls, right? If so, I'm not

Bikeshedding request for GHCi's :type

Hi devs, Over the weekend, I was pondering the Haskell course I will be teaching next year and shuddered at having to teach Foldable at the same time as `length`. So I implemented feature request #10963 (https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10963), which allows for a way for a user to