On 19/05/17 07:12 PM, Francesco Ariis wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Joachim Breitner wrote:
I thought about this. But I fear that this will require a language
extension or flag, and then the developers (quite rightly) say that it
does not pull its weight of supporting both variants, and it gets lost.
But maybe I should give it a shot if they accept it.
Indeed this strikes me as a not a good extension to have: every extension
further fragments the ecosystem and is yet another thing to care about if
you are reading someone else's code, etc. - the cost probably outweights
the benefit on this one.
But it seems a good proposal for H2020, as (if it is accepted), the costs
linked with an extension/flag (added complexity, fragmentation of the
community) aren't there.
The "extensions before report modification" is a solid rule, maybe
the committee wants to add an exception for proposals which cannot
realistically be "packaged" (and achieve widespread use) into
extensions?
I feel it's rather ironic that there exists a class of proposals
that are considered acceptable for Haskell' but too radical for GHC,
considering that the stands are usually completely opposite.
The obvious way out of this conundrum is to communicate with GHC.
If the Haskell' committee gives a proposal some sort of conditional
acceptance status, that should count for something with the GHC HQ.
After all, they'd presumably have to implement it once it's officially a
part of the next standard, so implementing it sooner as a proposal is
not that much more to ask.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
