Having coerce (!) show up in such a commonly used type class is a bit
alarming. Was there a libraries discussion about this? At least we
should add some docs to the method.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 12:37 AM, wrote:
> Repository : ssh://g...@git.haskell.org/base
>
> On branch : master
> Link
The discussion was back and forth with SPJ and Richard Eisenberg during the
discussion about the creation of the roles machinery and Simon suggested
the shape it currently has to me last night.
Having this in the class is the only way that this can lift over an
'unknown' Functor in local scope, an
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 25.09.2013, 03:04 -0400 schrieb Edward Kmett:
> The discussion was back and forth with SPJ and Richard Eisenberg
> during the discussion about the creation of the roles machinery and
> Simon suggested the shape it currently has to me last night.
given the recently intensified
This is great, but does needs some explanatory material, on the Haskell wiki or
Trac.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-commits [mailto:ghc-commits-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| g...@git.haskell.org
| Sent: 25 September 2013 05:38
| To: ghc-comm...@haskell.org
| Subject: [comm
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:18:51PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> given the recently intensified urge to make GHC a more community driven
> project, may I suggest to reduce the amount of off-list discussions? I
> find it very confusing if some discussions happen on list, some
> discussion on list
