That makes perfect sense to me. -Edward
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Yitzchak Gale <g...@sefer.org> wrote: > Yuras Shumovich wrote: > >> Can we generalize the proposal such that subsequent imports shadow > >> preceding ones? > > Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > > ...iirc there is a different idea... > > allowing explicitly enumerated names... > > to shadow imports from other modules which didn't explicitly name the > > same import; effectively introducing a higher-priority scope for names > > imported explicitly. > > Conversely - the original proposal should be modified to remain > an error, not a warning, when the symbol was imported explicitly > on an import list and then redefined locally at the top level. > This is equivalent to defining a symbol twice in the same scope. > > Thanks, > Yitz > _______________________________________________ > 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
