Andrzej Rybczak
Andrzej Rybczak
Did you try to make it work? Simply changing ghc dependency to ghc-lib doesn't work because of ghc-exactprint type mismatches, so presumably ghc-exactprint would also need to use ghc-lib.
We're close to merging https://github.com/well-typed/optics/pull/361 that'll get rid of visible `GeneralLabelOptic`. Reasons: - Pluggable incoherence leads to confusion - Field/position lenses from this library are not as efficient at compile...
I made `field` use lenses in VL form as an experiment to see how they compare since I noticed that functions used in the implementation of `GLens` typeclass are much...
Changes needed for compilation with GHC 8.2.2 are minimal. Tests also pass out of the box. The only thing that fails is a couple of doctests because the signatures are...
Another solution is to mark `pairing` for inlining, but why make GHC do more work than necessary. This makes prisms for constructors with multiple fields inline properly which in turn...
For testing performance of typical use cases of generic optics vs handwritten/TH generated ones.
Since test suites bump unfolding threshold to 150, I find they don't reflect the environment people write code in. As an example, when I run into the problem from #112...
Can you explain why these are incoherent? I think if it works as expected, it does only by accident. If any of the `s ~ t` or `a ~ b`...
Looks like you just need to bump upper version of `base`.