Hello Sebastian,
Thursday, October 13, 2005, 2:49:46 AM, you wrote:
SS I'm wondering what incremental and moderate extension means?
SS Does it mean completely backwards compatible or can it mean
SS completely new features including ones which subsume existing ones
SS (I'm specifically interested
Hello Sebastian,
Thursday, October 13, 2005, 4:09:55 PM, you wrote:
(I'm specifically interested in seeing SPJ's records proposal
included, and a new module system).
SS First of all I would like to urge the people who do end up working on
SS this to seriously consider replacing H98's
Hello Simon,
Thursday, October 13, 2005, 1:42:24 PM, you wrote:
(I'm specifically interested in seeing SPJ's records proposal
included, and a new module system).
SM Highly unlikely, IMHO. A new revision of the Haskell standard is not
SM the place for testing new research, rather it's a clear
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 02:09:55PM +0200, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Okay then. Consider this my contribution to the discussion.
First of all I would like to urge the people who do end up working on
this to seriously consider replacing H98's records system. I may be
wrong but the impression I get
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 10:42:24AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 12 October 2005 23:50, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
(I'm specifically interested in seeing SPJ's records proposal
included, and a new module system).
Highly unlikely, IMHO. A new revision of the Haskell standard is not
the place
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
I'm wondering what incremental and moderate extension means?
I don't know what others mean by it, but for me, it implies
standardizing existing practice, with possibly some conservative
redesign to get rid of any hysterical warts.
This is, BTW, what the C89 standard did
On Thursday 13 October 2005 09:42, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 12 October 2005 23:50, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
(I'm specifically interested in seeing SPJ's records proposal
included, and a new module system).
Highly unlikely, IMHO. A new revision of the Haskell standard is not
the place for
On 10/13/05, Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12 October 2005 23:50, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
(I'm specifically interested in seeing SPJ's records proposal
included, and a new module system).
Highly unlikely, IMHO. A new revision of the Haskell standard is not
the place for
On 10/13/05, Isaac Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the end of the Haskell Workshop at ICFP, we had the traditional
Future of Haskell discussion (chaired by Andres Loeh). One of the
main topics was the perceived need of a new standard, because the
Haskell 98 standard is quite old already, and
(Trimming CC list. Maybe we should take this to haskell-cafe?)
Sebastian Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(snip quotes)
I'm wondering what incremental and moderate extension means?
Does it mean completely backwards compatible or can it mean
completely new features including ones which
10 matches
Mail list logo
