You could probably get away with something like
On 10/02/2012 16:03, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:I've no objections to the plan itself, except that typeOf itself seems useful, so is there any need to deprecate it?
Friends
The page describes an improved implementation of the Typeable class, making use of polymorphic kinds. Technically it is straightforward, but it represents a non-backward-compatible change to a widely used library, so we need to make a plan for the transition.
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcKinds/PolyTypeable
Comments? You can fix typos or add issues directly in the wiki page, or discuss by email
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users