[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> * import and infix declarations anywhere in a module?
>
> I am against this proposal. Collecting all such declarations
> at the head of the module is better for human readers. Allowing
> them anywhere would also complicate and slow down program analysis
> that only requires module dependencies (eg. Haskell-specific `make'
> tools).
>
It would seem that if we allow infix decls anywhere, shouldn't we be
loosening up the location of import decls also?
Simon's proposal doesn't mention such key issues as what would be the
scope of an infix decl in the middle of a file.
> * layout rules
>
> A precise specification of the layout rules is clearly desirable.
> But the proposed change `relaxing' the rule for if-then-else seems a
> bit funny. Isn't it at odds with the original ISWIM motivation for
> having layout rules at all?
>
I thought the if-the-else proposal seemed odd until I followed the link
and read the exact proposal. Simon: your if-then-else example on the
Standard Haskell page seems at odds with the actual proposal (e.g. isn't
the point that the `else' itself needn't be indented?)
> * monomorphism restriction
>
> (Last but hardly least!) Surely MR qualifies as a trap that
> it would be nice to clean up. It takes three pages to explain in
> the 1.4 report, and there is plenty of evidence that programmers
> still fall over it frequently.
>
> Would it be too much/little to require all declaration groups in an
> exporting module to be unrestricted -- a straightforward syntactic
> condition?
Personally, I'd like to junk the MR, but I don't follow your suggestion?
--Jeff
