On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
> I propose that the haskell-src package be renamed
> haskell20nn-src for each revision Haskell 20nn of
> the standard, and be made an official machine-readable
> component of the standard.
>
As much as I like the idea of standardising a repre
Hi Neil,
Neil Mitchell wrote:
> There is nothing to stop an library author doing exactly this, and it
> might even be useful for some people (personally I'm going to stick to
> haskell-src-exts, because it's a brilliant library).
Yes, it is.
I am not proposing changing in any way how we
develop
Ben Millwood wrote:
> So we don't actually specify the content or API of the library itself,
> merely state its existence? If we specify the API we make those
> decisions, if we don't I don't see what exactly you are asking for...
> So why are you proposing that it be different from a Hackage packa
There is nothing to stop an library author doing exactly this, and it
might even be useful for some people (personally I'm going to stick to
haskell-src-exts, because it's a brilliant library). However, I don't
think we should make it official or part of the standard. I've found
plenty of HSE/GHC p
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
> Ben Millwood wrote:
>> But if we make the official parser usable for AST manipulation, we
>> have to rule on the design issues I raised above: whether to make
>> efforts to stop invalid lambdas being constructed, how to name the
>> types and
Ben Millwood wrote:
> But if we make the official parser usable for AST manipulation, we
> have to rule on the design issues I raised above: whether to make
> efforts to stop invalid lambdas being constructed, how to name the
> types and constructors, etc.
No we don't. With regard to its inclusion
On 17 nov 2010, at 16:21, Ben Millwood wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
>> Reading this proposal I think it clearly states my point made earlier:
>> allowing infix specifications everywhere provides unneeded flexibility and
>> unnecessary complexity.
>>
>> Ideally
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
> Ben Millwood wrote:
>> So essentially, all you are asking for is an official implementation
>> of haskell parsing, so that you input a program and it spits out
>> either "valid" or "not valid", according to the parts of the spec that
>> it au
.org
> [mailto:haskell-prime-boun...@haskell.org] On
> | Behalf Of Lennart Augustsson
> | Sent: 16 November 2010 19:52
> | To: Ben Millwood
> | Cc: haskell-prime@haskell.org
> | Subject: Re: Add haskell-src as an official machine-readable component of
> the Haskell
> | stand
Ben Millwood wrote:
> So essentially, all you are asking for is an official implementation
> of haskell parsing, so that you input a program and it spits out
> either "valid" or "not valid", according to the parts of the spec that
> it audits.
Yes, that is the most essential requirement.
It is a
Thanks, I'll look into all of that when I get a chance, hopefully soonish.
Cheers,
/Niklas
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Ben Millwood wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Lennart Augustsson
> wrote:
>> Please explain. Fixity information cannot be provided unless you find
>> all the i
Millwood
| Cc: haskell-prime@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Add haskell-src as an official machine-readable component of the
Haskell
| standard
|
| Please explain. Fixity information cannot be provided unless you find
| all the imported modules and process those, so I'm not sure how
| haskell-src
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Lennart Augustsson
wrote:
> Please explain. Fixity information cannot be provided unless you find
> all the imported modules and process those, so I'm not sure how
> haskell-src-exts could do any better than it currently does.
>
The tickets I had in mind were:
h
Please explain. Fixity information cannot be provided unless you find
all the imported modules and process those, so I'm not sure how
haskell-src-exts could do any better than it currently does.
>
> (Examples of controversies possible in haskell-src: we have the Hs
> prefix on constructors everyw
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
>
> I am not proposing that haskell-src become part of the
> standard libraries.
>
Right, I misunderstood here.
> Neither its design, nor its suitability for use in any application,
> are relevant to this proposal, except for one application:
Ben Millwood wrote:
> As much as I like the idea of standardising a representation of
> Haskell syntax, it's a highly nontrivial library and so coming to
> consensus on the various design decisions involved in producing the
> AST and so forth would be thorny if we started demanding that every
> imp
I propose that the haskell-src package be renamed
haskell20nn-src for each revision Haskell 20nn of
the standard, and be made an official machine-readable
component of the standard.
This has the following advantages:
1. It would require almost no extra work, because
haskell-src already exists, an
17 matches
Mail list logo
