Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
I'd argue that it's not. Haskell hasn't had a release in years, and I think it's time to put a little pressure on the community. The question is: who is "the community"? It's fairly clear that the Haskell Prime process itself is languishing. The last message about the development process that I

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Gábor Lehel
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > I'd argue that it's not. Haskell hasn't had a release in years, and I think > it's time to put a little pressure on the community. > > > > The question is: who is “the community”? > > > > It’s fairly clear that the Haskell Prime process

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Kim-Ee Yeoh
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Gábor Lehel wrote: > > But in Haskell right now, for practical purposes, we don't have competing implementations. We have GHC. Isn't "putting pressure on the community" for a new standard a way to, umm, implement wished-for features in GHC economically? ;) -- Kim

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Jason Dusek
2012/11/30 Gábor Lehel : > Executive summary: We don't need a new standard right now. If > people don't think it's worth their while to work on it, > they're probably right. New, competing implementations might > be valuable. If we have them, there will be demand for a > standard, making decisions

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Johan Tibell
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Jason Dusek wrote: > It would be nice for there to be a new standard so that many > features in GHC -- such as overloaded strings, rank n types, > MPTCs, &c. -- were enabled by default without any pragmas. I think this is one of these nice gains for day-to-day Has

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Gábor Lehel
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Nate Soares wrote: > >> This standardization process amounts to "endorsement of existing >> features" which seems like not a bad process at all. It makes >> the standard descriptive rather than predictive. > > > +1. I agree generally with Gabor's points -- GHC is

Re: [Haskell] Status of Haskell'?

2012-11-30 Thread Henning Thielemann
On Sat, 1 Dec 2012, Gábor Lehel wrote: On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Nate Soares wrote: +1. I agree generally with Gabor's points -- GHC is in the drivers seat. But at some point we should take a look at all the things GHC has made that did pay off and that are good and make them officia