#11385: Unify named wildcards in different type applications -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: Iceland_jack | Owner: Type: feature request | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler (Type | Version: 8.1 checker) | Keywords: Resolution: | NamedWildCards TypeApplications Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by goldfire): I'm assuming your `:: ...` in comment:3 are meant to be inferred, not part of what the user writes. Then yes. And your final example in comment:3 should most certainly be allowed; if it's not, we've designed the thing very wrongly. And I agree with all your examples in comment:4 except, possibly, the last. But it's probably just simpler to accept the last example along with the others. How does this contrast with comment:9:ticket:11350? These are top-level, whereas those are in an instance declaration. I think it's reasonable to have slightly different behavior. In both cases, the function body is interpreted with respect to the user-written type signature for the function. It's just that, in the instance case, the user-written type signature isn't really the full story. But I think it's all OK. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11385#comment:5 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler