as long as we clearly communicate that there may be refinements / breaking changes subsequently, i'm all for it, unless merging it in slows down 7.8 hitting RC . (its taken long enough for RC to happen... don't want to drag it out further)
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Richard Eisenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for inclusion. This is a nicely opt-in feature, and so (barring any > regressions) only those intrepid people who want it will be affected. > > Richard > > On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:17 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Am Montag, den 06.01.2014, 12:42 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones: > >> We could put it in the release with warnings saying "the exact > >> details, esp of syntax, might change, but do try it". I'd be ok with > >> that, and we've done it before. > >> > >> What do other people think? > > > > This feature may be so good that people will use it in, say, released > > libraries, disregarding the warning. > > > > But it seems that any possible syntax change will only affect those who > > define pattern synonyms, and not those who use them, and hence only > > cause work for those disregarding the warning, I’m in favor of > > inclusion. > > > > Greetings, > > Joachim > > > > > > -- > > Joachim “nomeata” Breitner > > [email protected] • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ > > Jabber: [email protected] • GPG-Key: 0x4743206C > > Debian Developer: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > > ghc-devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
