On May 19, 2011 4:57 AM, "Henk-Jan van Tuyl" <hjgt...@chello.nl> wrote: > > On Wed, 18 May 2011 23:21:27 +0200, Antoine Latter <aslat...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't have a problem with these extensions being in the Haskell >> Platform, as the platform currently only targets GHC, but the >> bytestring package itself might have a higher standard of portability. > > > So you want the packages that use extensions thrown out, as soon as another Haskell compiler becomes popular? As one of the targets of the Haskell Platform is stability, it is not advisable to target just one compiler. >
Portability and adherence to standards is a goal worth striving for, but the platform policy stated on the wiki is that packages in the platform should build on all compilier targets. I think we need to be pragmatic about what we include - for example functional dependencies are still controversial, but that doesn't mean that the 'mtl' package should be tossed out of the platform. But perhaps it does mean that, for example, the 'containers' package should be subject to a higher level of scutiny for its public API. The 'bytestring' package might also be such a package where we prioritize portability. I'm not active in the maintaince of the platform; perhaps I'm mis-stating the goals and policies. Antoine
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
