"Tantamount to a new language" to fix a minor detail in a typeclass hierarchy? That is just histrionic. *No* language is that stable.
Scala makes dozens of changes like that between *minor* versions, and while I hardly hold up their development practices as the best in the industry it is still somehow seen as enterprise ready. -Edward On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Adrian May <adrian.alexander....@gmail.com>wrote: > >> PS The proposal to fix Functor => Applicative => Monad has patches >> attached for GHC and base, but the backwards compatibility bogeyman always >> seems to trump something that will break a lot of code. > > > I think that should be fixed as well, but it would be tantamount to a new > language. > > I guess you need some kind of versioning system for the libraries. Why not > put them all in a public source control server and have ghc force people to > say which snapshot they wanted. That would be your final breaking change, > and it's a one-liner in the Makefile. Then you could thrash around as much > as you liked and people like me would have nothing to complain about. > Naturally, the compiler itself should keep supporting old modes. > > Adrian. > > > >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Haskell-Cafe mailing list >> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org >> http://www.haskell.org/**mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe<http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe