Re: Void type in base

On 17/07/13 07:14, Shachaf Ben-Kiki wrote:

It seems strange that there's a canonical unit type -- () -- which is used extensively, but no canonical type for its dual, the uninhabited type. The closest we have is in Edward Kmett's void package, but several people seem to prefer to write it themselves rather than incur an extra dependency, which is a shame.

What is the advantage of having Data.Void in base compared to a separate package? I think the real issue is including the module in the Haskell Platform. It is not as if people don't use other platform libraries like containers. Twan