Hi, Am Mittwoch, den 13.03.2013, 14:04 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones: > Your follow-on remarks (appended below) about which implicit Prelude > you get if you (say) import only `base-pure` are well-taken, but they > apply equally to (B). Worth adding a section to the Wiki page to > discuss this?
Sure, done, including stated opinions so far: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/SplitBase#HandlingPrelude I also noticed an advantage of (P2) (No Prelude in any of the shim packages, but in a separate base-prelude package): It allows programmers to mix conveniently the shim packages with packages that provide a non-standard prelude (classy-prelude comes to my mind) without any use of NoImplicitPrelude. (Just stating that for completeness, my preference is still option (P4)+(I1), i.e. multiple partial Prelude modules which all automatically imported.) 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
