On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:30:47PM +0000, Malcolm Wallace wrote: > Jan-Willem Maessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > * A renamer turns out to be awfully useful/necessary; this raises > > the sticky question of how imports are specified. It'd be nice *not* > > to have to dredge up the old .hi files, as they tended to require > > compilers to extend the .hi format in really non-standard ways. > > On this page: > http://haskell.galois.com/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/ModuleSystem > the suggestion "Permit Signatures in Export Lists" would place > the necessary interface information directly in the source files, > rather than in separate .hi files. Would that solve the renaming > problem?
There is no naming problem other than that ghc just hasn't implemented it. jhc and helium both do cross module renaming properly and it is quite well specified. http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~diatchki/hsmod/ we might want to take some of the text from this paper and integrate it into the report rather than the current informal treatment. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
