Brian | Actually re-reading my post I realised I may have sounded a bit negative | about the hard work you'd done to collate the various responses to form the | wiki proposal - my apologies
Thanks -- email is a fragile medium! | I've followed your suggestion and made a separate page at | http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcPackagesAlternativeProposal Jolly good, thank you. I've looked at it. Happily, so far as I can see the two proposals are identical! At least I cannot identify any points of difference. If you think they differ, can you say where? Your spec is a little unclear about whether the package name is compulsory in every import. Under "The best of both worlds / Shared name space" you say that plain "import A.B.C" looks in all exposed packages and bleats if its ambiguous. That's what we propose, and it's satisfactorily backward compatible. And that is what your syntax implies too. Simon _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
