Matthew Lutze

> Oh, that makes sense. Would it fit into either missing or extra label, or do I create a new error? It could be an extra label for `y`, but...

`Map` has a different arity from `List` and `Set` so it doesn't directly work there. I see two options: 1. Another type class for Binary type constructors. 2. Associated type...

Is the question relating to the fact that map has a different syntax? ``` Map#{"a" => 1, "b" => 2} ```

See some discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/18ncub/ghc_head_now_has_overloadedlists_as_an_extension/ Note that some of the negatives are in regard to the option of omitting the type, which I am not sure we should allow. There...

> > Just wondering if this will always work out neatly. > > It works for List, Set, Vector, Array, and Map at least. Which allow us to remove their...

> > > > Just wondering if this will always work out neatly. > > > > > > > > > It works for List, Set, Vector, Array, and...

> > Only Map if we do extra magic for key -> value mappings > > Yeah isn't it just `Map|('a', 1), ('b', 2)|`? and `Map|1, ,2|` will give some...

It's indeed illegal at the moment; we need to discuss what exactly should be allowed. Meanwhile, there is a workaround: ```scala def enqueueAll(mq: MutQueue[Iterable.Elm[m], r], m: m): Unit \ r...

Let's keep it. With the new solver we should eventually be able to allow this.

Maybe native types should automatically have a `ToJava` instance that is just the identity function. Otherwise manipulating collections of Java types could become difficult as everything needs a trivial instance...