On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:44:51AM -0500, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Nate Soares <n...@so8r.es> wrote:
>
> > I second this question. At what point do we cut Haskell' with what we
> > have, release it, and push the big undecideds back to Haskell"?
>
> Maybe the question is whether we have anything. We already skipped 2011
> because there wasn't anything worth the effort of a new standard.
FWIW, I stopped working on writing things up as proposals after (TTBOMK)
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/2011-February/003362.html
didn't happen.
The big things (GADTs, FD vs AT, etc) are probably still some way off,
but there are plenty of incremental changes that we could make now to
improve the language. For example, adding negative literals should be
simple and would be nice to have, and adding DeriveDataTypeable
hopefully wouldn't be too controversial and would help us reach a point
where people don't feel the need to use CPP and/or hand-write instances.
Thanks
Ian
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
