Dear all,

I recommend that we accept this proposal. The only problematic (read, not backwards-compatible) bit is the case of a type class having instances for both `Nat` and `Natural`, but that seems very unlikely.

Something which I thought about was whether any of `Nat` or `Natural` were implementing something akin to Peano naturals (so we could have inductive instances working on Zero and (Succ n)), both none of both do, so the alignment seems correct to me.

Regards,

Alejandro

El vie., 25 sept. 2020 a las 16:06, Joachim Breitner (<mail@joachim-breitner.de>) escribió:

Dear Committee,

this is your secretary speaking:

Unify Nat and Natural
has been proposed by Richard
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/364
https://github.com/goldfirere/ghc-proposals/blob/natural/proposals/0000-unify-natural.rst

I’ll propose Alejandro as the shepherd.

Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process

Thanks,
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