#8894: Clean up `Coercible` plumbing -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Reporter: nomeata | Owner: nomeata Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.9 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Difficulty: Unknown Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: #8904 -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Comment (by simonpj): No, wired-in things are never written to any interface file. GHC already knows all about them, so there's not point in serialising them. Yes, the data constructor would match. (Of course that requires a `Note`.) By declaring a data type and using it as a class we are already being naughty in a different way, so it's really no worse. I have not thought about "no magic in base", although I have not objection. If that's the route you go, be sure to document it as the reason (in `GHC.Coerce`) so that we know in five years time. Simon -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8894#comment:9 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler