Hi, Am Dienstag, den 12.03.2013, 14:35 +0000 schrieb Ian Lynagh: > I think we should avoid getting bogged down in one small detail at this > stage. If we make the bulk of the changes now then we still have a few > months to polish the result before it gets effectively frozen by being > released.
I’m not sure it is just a small detail: The handling of Prelude will influence how practical it is to use the shim package, and how practical it is to use just some of the shim packages. > If you don't like the idea of putting it in its own package, then I > think either the file-io package (as that's the "worst" thing it > contains) or the pure package (as that's the package most likely to be > depended on anyway) would make most sense. Both have issues: Putting it in file-io will cause everyone to depend on file-io, subverting „To allow packages to be explict about what they need (G2)“. Putting it in pure will make pure not pure any more, as the Prelude would still have to contain writeFile etc. But you are right that this discussing this should not prevent us from deciding between A, B and both, and then actually doing it. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
