I'm entirely open to this being a GHC flag rather than a language extension flag. I was just following the pattern of NoImplicitPrelude.
I'll get a bit further, document my progress, and invite public feedback. Simon On Mon, 16 Mar 2026 at 16:03, Brandon Allbery <[email protected]> wrote: > TBH I'm inclined to agree with this. In particular, I think of language > extensions as things that potentially could find their way into a standard > (or quasi-standard like `GHC2xxx`). As such, there may be a couple of > others that could use a look. (`NoImplicitPrelude` I would not consider > such, since it's useful with alternative preludes.) >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
