I don't remember the details, but I assume that -XRequiredTypeArguments is essentially useless without this sort of patterns, isn't it? Plus this is the only occurrence of -XScopedTypeVariables in the text (well, there's one just below, but it's about what -XScopedTypeVariables *doesn't* do). It sounds like the right choice.
Agreed, we shouldn't require ScopedTypeVariables here.
Adam
On 25/08/2023 20:32, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> Yes -- I'm in support.
>
>> On Aug 25, 2023, at 12:12 PM, Simon Peyton Jones
>> <simon.peytonjones@gmail.com <mailto:simon.peytonjones@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I support this.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 15:39, Joachim Breitner
>> <mail@joachim-breitner.de <mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear committee,
>>
>> Vladislav Zavialov in
>> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/605
>> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/605>
>> proposes a small fix to #281, namely that for
>>
>> f :: forall x -> Show x => x -> String
>> f (type t) = show @t
>>
>> to work, ExplicitNamespaces and RequiredTypeArguments is sufficient,
>> and we should not also require ScopedTypeVariables, which we are
>> moving
>> away from.
>>
>> I’ll shepherd this myself, and I suggest acceptance.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Joachim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joachim Breitner
>> mail@joachim-breitner.de <mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de>
>> http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ <http://www.joachim-breitner.de/>
>>
--
Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant
Well-Typed LLP, https://www.well-typed.com/
Registered in England & Wales, OC335890
27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX, England
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
--