In my eyes, one of the most important use of type-signatures-for-everything (apart from a welcome uniformity), is the will to deprecate `*` in favour of `Type`. That is because, in practice, I always use `*` in CUSKS (of which I use a lot!), as with `Type`, they would become immensely crowded and, to me at least, barely readable. In short: to me type-signatures-for-everything is the one blocker for deprecating `*`. So let's look at this proposal through the lens of this use-case: - Associated type declaration are already kind of type signature assignments. - Except only partial, as some of the variables will be to the left of the type families - But these extra variables are already mentioned in the type class, where their type can be specified. In particular by a kind signature! So do I need to write `(Type -> Type) -> Type` near a type variable? No, I don't. I guess I'm in favour, then. On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 11:44 PM Iavor Diatchki <iavor.diatchki@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, seems reasonable to me as well.
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 2:41 PM Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de> wrote:
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 06.09.2019, 16:42 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee:
So making them illegal now keeps our options open for the future.
compelling argument, am in favor :-)
Cheers, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee