3 Oct
2012
3 Oct
'12
12:17 p.m.
Uhm, you answered my question already, I just didn't read your email
carefully:
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
* All this is fine. But we don't (ever) want the programmer to write any instance of Typeable; that ways lies seg-faults, since we may rely on their veracity.
I think I agree, but, then again, I have never written my own Typeable instances. Do note, however, that GHC currently uses the `time` package, which gives manual `Typeable` instances (CC-ing Ashley; maybe he can defend writing Typeable instances manually). I noticed this while working on the change-over to the kind-polymorphic `Typeable`. Cheers, Pedro