CAN_OVERLAP and CAN_BE_OVERLAPPED? (instead of OVERLAPPING and OVERLAPPABLE) Or CAN-OVERLAP, CAN-BE-OVERLAPPED That’s ok with me if that’s what you all want! Simon From: Glasgow-haskell-users [mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Krzysztof Skrzetnicki Sent: 29 July 2014 16:56 To: Brandon Allbery Cc: Simon Peyton Jones; Andreas Abel; GHC users; Haskell Libraries (libraries@haskell.org); ghc-devs Subject: Re: Overlapping and incoherent instances How about CAN_OVERLAP? -- Krzysztof 29-07-2014 15:40, "Brandon Allbery" <allbery.b@gmail.com<mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com>> napisał(a): On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Andreas Abel <andreas.abel@ifi.lmu.de<mailto:andreas.abel@ifi.lmu.de>> wrote: +1. I like Niklas' syntax better. Also OVERLAPPABLE is a horrible word, OVERLAPPING sound less formidable (even though it might be slightly less accurrate). We already get "overlap ok" in instance-related type errors, so OVERLAP_OK wouldn't be particularly alien even if it doesn't quite fit in with existing pragmas. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com<mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com> ballbery@sinenomine.net<mailto:ballbery@sinenomine.net> unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org<mailto:Libraries@haskell.org> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries