+1 from me for keeping the two separate as well. While GHC may be the obviously
prevalent Haskell compiler it is a far from the only one,
And I’d hate to have to look at a proposal for adding an extension to GHC
(which would be riddled with GHC specific implementation specifics)
Rather than a clean specification.
Maybe I’m naïve but I also see the Haskell committees as doing more than just
copy pasting what’s worked. But also evaluate how it can be done
Better. I can perfectly well see situations where the implementation in GHC
ended up being less useful than It should be just because of
Implementation quirks/difficulties in GHC.
Cheers,
Tamar
From: Richard Eisenberg
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
