Re: Unpacking single-field, single-strict-constructor GADTs and existentials

No, because the pattern matching semantics are different. Matching on the constructor *must* force the contents to maintain type safety. It's really strict data with the newtype optimization, rather than a bona fide newtype. On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Ben Gamari wrote:

David Feuer writes:

...

Not really. It's really just the newtype optimization, although it's not a newtype.

Ahh, I see. Yes, you are right. I was being silly.

However, in this case wouldn't it make more sense to just call it a newtype?

Cheers,

- Ben