Am Donnerstag, 22. November 2007 02:07 schrieb Alex Jacobson: > Duncan Coutts wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 19:26 -0500, Alex Jacobson wrote: > >> Ok, I'm game to default to haskell98 in the presence of ambiguity, but > >> in most cases the extension involves new syntax and that should be > >> enough. > > > > In these cases ghc does generally give an error message which mentions > > which extension it is that you should use. This is actually better than > > the case where you forget to import something when ghc doesn't helpfully > > tell you which module you forgot to import. > > My point is that the default should be to give a warning rather than an > error and provide the user with the ability to turn those warnings off. > > > As others have said, one major reason for declaring extensions is for > > portability. > > The warning should be enough information for people who want to avoid > accidentally adding features that will cause their code not to run on > other compilers. For those that don't care, forcing them to add > zillions of pragmas is an excessive burden. > > -Alex-
Dont’t just think in terms of single modules. If I have a Cabal package, I can declare used extensions in the Cabal file. A user can decide not to start building at all if he/she sees that the package uses an extension unsupported by the compiler. Best wishes, Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users