effectfully

> If we abstract over the matcher with a function we lose this property (since function arguments get forced). But maybe we recover it with inlining But we're not inlining...

@mjaskelioff > Yes. We would have to go for extending the notion of a) and saying that a SOP of builtin types is a builtin type. As per our Slack...

Note that as far as I remember from the specification/formalization point of view we also need to allow for `->` to appear in types of arguments for pattern matching builtins,...

@wadler > This is the one place where I disagree. If we add SOP to improve (time and space) efficiency, and we make a change to builtins to improve efficiency,...

@kwxm > I don't have much to say, I find this (about option1) a bit disturbing: > > > a much larger change (propagating through many parts of the builtins...

I agree it doesn't make any sense. Could you dump the Core of `PlutusCore.Evaluation.Machine.MachineParameters.Default` and post it somewhere / send it to me via email for me to take a...

Pretty much all the benchmarking results in this thread look random to me.

@uhbif19 would you be interested in helping us out? Maybe it's possible to simply adapt [`deriveEq`](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/deriving-compat-0.6.1/docs/Data-Eq-Deriving-Internal.html#v:deriveEq) without much change? It relies on [`buildTypeInstance`](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/deriving-compat-0.6.1/docs/src/Data.Deriving.Internal.html#buildTypeInstance), which accepts any [`ClassRep`](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/deriving-compat-0.6.1/docs/src/Data.Deriving.Internal.html#ClassRep), which is where...

Thank you very much!

@michaelpj so are we interested in providing this functionality? If so, may I ask to to create a Jira ticket for it with all the details, so that we can...