Bulat Ziganshin wrote: > Simon Marlow wrote: > >> 3. Update the libraries to match what we have at the moment. >> e.g. rename List to Data.List, and add the handful of >> functions that have since been added to Data.List. One >> problem with this is that these modules are then tied to >> the language definition, and can't be changed through >> the usual library proposal process. > > not necessarily. we already apply versioning to these libs, it may be > made official in Report too. i.e. Report defines libraries standard > for year 2010 (like it defines language standard for only one year), > while we continue to improve libraries that will eventually become > version standard for year 2011 (or higher)
If I understand that correctly, this would mean to simply include the particular version of a library that happens to be the current one at the report deadline. In other words, the report specifies that say version 4.1.0.0 of the base library is the standard one for 2010. Since old library versions are archived on hackage, this looks like a cheap and easy solution to me. It's more an embellishment of alternative 1. than a genuine 3. Regards, apfelmus -- http://apfelmus.nfshost.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
