* Ben Gamari <bgamari.f...@gmail.com> [2013-09-17 12:41:05-0400] > Roman Cheplyaka <r...@ro-che.info> writes: > > > * Ben Gamari <bgamari.f...@gmail.com> [2013-09-17 10:03:41-0400] > >> Another approach might be to introduce some notion of a name list which > >> can appear in the export list. These lists could be built up by either > >> user declarations in the source module or in Template Haskell splices > >> and would serve as a way to group logically related exports. This > >> would allow uses such as (excuse the terrible syntax), > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > Isn't this subsumed by ordinary Haskell modules, barring the current > > compilers' limitation that modules are in 1-to-1 correspondence with > > files (and thus are somewhat heavy-weight)? > > > > E.g. the above could be structured as > > > > module MyDataLenses where > > data MyData = MyData { ... } > > makeLenses ''MyData > > > > module HelloWorld (module MyDataLenses, ...) where > > ... > > > True. Unfortunately I've not seen much motion towards relaxing this > limitation[1]. > > Cheers, > > - Ben > > > [1] http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/2551
I guess there simply were not many use cases for that. This may be one. At least if we are talking about changing the compiler anyway, it's better to stick with a well-understood and standardized mechanism. Roman
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe