On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, apfelmus wrote: > Robert Will wrote: > > Could someone please summarize the current status and planned time > > line for Haskell'? > > John Launchbury wrote: > > Up to now, the Haskell' effort has been mostly about exploring the > > possibilities, to find out what could be in Haskell', and to scope out > > what it might mean. We've now reached the stage where we want to do the > > opposite, namely trying to pin down what we definitely want to have in > > the standard, and what it should look like in detail. > > There's still a major technical obstacle, namely functional dependencies > vs associated type synonyms .
The right thing is probably to admit that it's going to take a few years to resolve adequately, get a standard now and get a new standard or an addendum when those few years are up. This has the problem that it leaves us with crippled interfaces for standard libraries, but we already have that problem! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire. Most of the time you just get burnt worse though. _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
