#12030: GHCi Proposal: Display (Data.Kind.)Type instead of * -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: Iceland_jack | Owner: Type: feature | Status: new request | Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: GHCi | Version: 8.1 Keywords: TypeInType | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- This is premature but what the darn, {{{
:kind Maybe Maybe :: Type -> Type :kind StateT StateT :: Type -> (Type -> Type) -> Type -> Type :kind Eq Eq :: Type -> Constraint
:info Functor class Functor (f :: Type -> Type) where ... }}}
`*` throws students off and makes it seem scarier than it is. Symbols are harder to search for in general and to understand without documentation, `Type` on the other hand is descriptive. There are valid arguments against displaying `Type`: 1. It's a recent feature subject to change. 2. Although symbols are more difficult to search for, `*` is established in educational materials, logs, blogs and questions. 3. By default `Type` is not in scope so a user cannot ask for information in GHCi. `*` is established and searching for “Haskell asterisk” yields a lot resources but [https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en ‘*’ is also a wildcard] in Google and ignored by GitHub. With time `Type` would be a good search term but currently it's chicken-and-the-egg. Previous versions of GHCi error on `:kind *` and `:info *` only shows multiplication so that wouldn't be a huge difference but we can qualify by default: {{{
:kind Maybe Maybe :: Data.Kind.Type -> Data.Kind.Type :kind StateT StateT :: Data.Kind.Type -> (Data.Kind.Type -> Data.Kind.Type) -> Data.Kind.Type -> Data.Kind.Type :kind Eq Eq :: Data.Kind.Type -> Constraint
:info Functor class Functor (f :: Data.Kind.Type -> Data.Kind.Type) where ... }}}
or display `*` normally and only when `TypeInType` is set do we display `Type`. I don't love it (and love `GHC.Types.Type` slightly less) but there is a precedent for unqualified names, browsing the Prelude for example: {{{#!hs ($) :: forall (r :: GHC.Types.RuntimeRep) a (b :: TYPE r). (a -> b) -> a -> b undefined :: forall (r :: GHC.Types.RuntimeRep) (a :: TYPE r). GHC.Stack.Types.HasCallStack => a }}} __If__ the consensus is that this will happen sometime down the line consider that each passing release means many more books and blog posts get written using `*`. I wasn't planning on resulting to scare tactics but [https://www.peoria.com/spaw/spawimages/members/member60763/shoot_this_dog.jp... here we are]... ---- If needed a migration plan can be drafted like the Semigroup/FTP/AMP/BBP/MonadFail/expanding Float/... proposals, possibly culminating in `Type` fully replacing `*` and being imported by default. I'm sure there are some further reaching consequences to this and better arguments against. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12030 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler