Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread scooter . phd
reg Fitzgerald Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:24:23 To: Simon Peyton-Jones Cc: GHC users Subject: Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1 ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/g

Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Greg Fitzgerald
> Another minor question is whether "-XDoRec" is a good > name for the flag. We can't really use "-XRecursiveDo" > because that's the one we are deprecating! "-XReDo" :) -Greg ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org ht

RE: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
| Analogously, is | | | > do { a <- getChar | | > ; rec { b <- f c | | >; c <- g b } | | > ; putChar c | | > ; return b } | | equivalent to | | | > do { a <- getChar | | > ; rec { b <- f c | | >; c <- g b } in do | | > { putChar c

Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread kahl
Simon Peyton Jones answered me: > | > do { a <- getChar > | > ; rec { b <- f c > | >; c <- g b } > | > ; putChar c > | > ; return b } > > > | This last point notwithstanding, > | I find the scoping rules very unintuitive! > | (b and c appear to escape

Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 22:55 +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > SECOND, we have produced Release Candidate 1 for GHC 6.12.1, and are > about to produce RC2. However, before releasing 6.12 we'd like to > compile all of Hackage, in case doing so reveals bugs in GHC's APIs > (which are not supposed t

RE: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
g programs :-) Simon | -Original Message- | From: Lennart Augustsson [mailto:lennart.augusts...@gmail.com] | Sent: 29 October 2009 10:25 | To: Bulat Ziganshin | Cc: Simon Peyton-Jones; GHC users | Subject: Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1 | | Bulat, that would not be in the ghc tradition of breakin

RE: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
| > do { a <- getChar | > ; rec { b <- f c | >; c <- g b } | > ; putChar c | > ; return b } | This last point notwithstanding, | I find the scoping rules very unintuitive! | (b and c appear to escape their apparently nested scope.) well you are happy with

Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-29 Thread Bulat Ziganshin
Hello Simon, Thursday, October 29, 2009, 1:55:00 AM, you wrote: > Currently 'mdo' is enabled by -XRecursiveDo. So we propose to > deprecate this flag, with another flag -XDoRec to enable the 'rec' > keyword. i think the best way is to support both in 6.12, marking mdo usage as deprecated, and r

Re: Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-28 Thread kahl
Simon Peyton Jones wrote: > > Recursive do-notation. > ~~ > The change is this. Instead of writing > > mdo { a <- getChar > ; b <- f c > ; c <- g b > ; putChar c > ; return b } > > you would write > > do { a <- getChar > ; rec

Update on GHC 6.12.1

2009-10-28 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
Folks This is an update on the status of GHC 6.12. FIRST, as you probably know, Hackage and the Haskell Platform is allowing GHC HQ to get out of the libraries business. So the plan is - We release GHC 6.12 with very few libraries - Bill Library Author downloads GHC 6.12 and tests his libra