That doesn't seem to be saying anything motivating the choice of name, just motivates the existence of some nullary unboxed type.

-Edward


On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Roman Cheplyaka <roma@ro-che.info> wrote:
Have you read the Note [Nullary unboxed tuple] in compiler/types/Type.lhs?
I think it addresses this, although I'm not going to pretend I
understand what's going on there.

Roman

* Krzysztof Gogolewski <krz.gogolewski@gmail.com> [2013-12-17 19:28:14+0100]
> Hello,
>
> Small bikeshedding: I propose to rename recently added Void# (in GHC.Prim)
> to Unit#, and void# to unit#. As far as I understand, this type is the
> unboxed equivalent of () (i.e. single-element type) rather than Void (i.e.
> empty type). The name Void# might be reserved for a type which has
> completely no inhabitants. Any comments?
>
> KG

> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs


_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs