Yes, the inference of call-stacks is being removed. I'm just waiting for the patch to be reviewed.
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016, at 06:22, George Colpitts wrote: > Was there any consensus on how to move forward on this? I just found > another example of > > 8.0 type which is not beginner friendly: > > bash-3.2$ ghci > GHCi, version 8.0.0.20160204: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ :? for help > Prelude> True > True > it :: Bool > Prelude> True || undefined > True > *it :: ?callStack::GHC.Stack.Types.CallStack => Bool* > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:56 PM Ericson, John <john_eric...@brown.edu> > wrote: > > > I dispute your second point a bit: I consider any Prelude changes a > > standard library change than a language change, not withstanding the fact > > the Prelude is imported by default. Any beginner-language library can still > > be imported from normal code. Likewise a "hygienic copy paste" would simply > > import the beginner prelude qualified and mangle identifiers as necessary. > > > > I'm inclined to think the Racket way is the only true solution here. > > > > John > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Manuel M T Chakravarty < > > c...@justtesting.org> wrote: > > > >> Two notable differences between Racket and the situation in Haskell is > >> that (1) Racket has a full blown IDE to support the staged languages and > >> (2) AFIK any Racket program in a simpler language is still a valid Racket > >> program in a more advanced language. (The latter wouldn’t be the case with, > >> e.g., a Prelude omitting type classes as you need to introduce new names > >> —to avoid overloading— that are no longer valid in the full Prelude.) > >> > >> Manuel > >> > >> > Eric Seidel <e...@seidel.io>: > >> > > >> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:09, Christopher Allen wrote: > >> >> I have tried a beginner's Prelude with people. I don't have a lot of > >> data > >> >> because it was clearly a failure early on so I bailed them out into the > >> >> usual thing. It's just not worth it and it deprives them of the > >> >> preparedness to go write real Haskell code. That's not something I'm > >> >> willing to give up just so I can teach _less_. > >> > > >> > Chris, have you written about your experiences teaching with a > >> > beginner's Prelude? I'd be quite interested to read about it, as (1) it > >> > seems like a natural thing to do and (2) the Racket folks seem to have > >> > had good success with their staged teaching languages. > >> > > >> > In particular, I'm curious if your experience is in the context of > >> > teaching people with no experience programming at all, vs programming > >> > experience but no Haskell (or generally FP) experience. The Racket "How > >> > to Design Programs" curriculum seems very much geared towards absolute > >> > beginners, and that could be a relevant distinction. > >> > > >> > Thanks! > >> > Eric > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > ghc-devs mailing list > >> > ghc-devs@haskell.org > >> > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ghc-devs mailing list > >> ghc-devs@haskell.org > >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ghc-devs mailing list > > ghc-devs@haskell.org > > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
