As I answered in my other mail: no. There is Type.Reflection.typeRep, which does that. Also Dict is not in base, you'd first need to add that there. - Oleg On 23.8.2023 13.54, Tom Ellis wrote:
On rereading maybe my question is a big ambiguous. What I'm really asking is "do people support the addition of (and see the value of) a function of the following type?"
forall (a :: k). Typeable a => Dict (Typable (a :: k))
It might require changes to GHC, I'm not sure. I suppose the new/proposed ghc-experimental package would be a good place for it to start its life.
Tom
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:50:10AM +0100, Tom Ellis wrote:
Morally I think that
class Typeable (a :: k)
should have been
class Typeable k => Typeable (a :: k)
If I'm wrong, could someone please elaborate why? If I'm right, please read on ...
That would be a breaking change, but could we at least get
kindable :: forall (a :: k). Typeable a => Dict (Typable (a :: k))
in the meantime?
Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.