> I don't think this is compatible with things like adding support
> for the library hierarchy with multiple dots to Haskell 98 as you
> will then be able to write a program that is valid Haskell 98 by
> todays definition but not yesterdays. OTOH if what you mean is
> adding support incrementally to todays *tools* and declaring H98
> with a set of the new features to be Haskell 2 at some point in
> the future then I don't have a problem with that.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that we change the meaning of the
term "Haskell 98": it is, and always will be, defined by the Haskell 98
report. The idea behind "addenda" to the report is to define a family
of new languages, eg. Haskell 98 + FFI, Haskell 98 + FFI + Exceptions,
and so on.
These languages may be incompatible with pure Haskell 98, but compilers
will generally give you the choice between pure Haskell 98 and whatever
extensions are supported.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
