Re: Remove eq and show from num class

[Anthony Clayden]

> On Fri Sep 8 15:58:10 UTC 2017, Carter Schonwald wrote:
>
> I mostly wanted to confirm that we in fact will actually
say yes
> before doing the formal writtingup :)

Seriously -- and please stop using smileys: 
you're right to be cautious.
You need to rewrite the whole of Section 6.4
(nearly 5 pages), starting with changing the title.
And I think it'll be a struggle to clarify what applies
to genuine numbers vs what applies to 'other stuff'.
As Bardur says:
> far from trivial to spec without reference to
implementation details

I think there's another way: leave Sec 6.4 largely
unchanged.
Add a short note that implementations might extend
class `Num` to include non-numbers.

GHC 'morally complies' to section 6.4 for Numbers.
(i.e. all number types are members of `Num, Eq, Show`.)

GHC has (or allows) other types in `Num` which are not
numbers,
so section 6.4 doesn't apply.

I'm puzzled by Bardur's other comments:
> On Fri Sep 8 16:16:54 UTC 2017, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
>
> There aren't really any widely used Haskell compilers
> other than GHC ...

That's true and sad and a weakness for Haskell
in general. On this particular topic there are
other compilers: GHC prior v7.4, Hugs.

> and speccing for things that aren't actually used in
practice ...

But there's already a spec! namely the existing report.
And `Eq`, `Show` for numbers are used heavily.

I think this proposal is not to remove `Eq, Show`
from number types that already have them(?)
But Carter's subject line does seem to be saying that,
which is what alarmed me at first reading.


AntC
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Carter Schonwald]

I personally kinda enjoy latex.  Granted that's assuming it's well written
:)

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM Herbert Valerio Riedel 
wrote:

> Hello *,
>
> On 2017-09-08 at 00:46:52 +0200, Mario Blazevic wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> If the report was written in reStructuredText we could simply use
> >> something like the readthedocs.org service. But since it's LaTeX, we
> >> have to do a little bit more work to publishes ("deploys" in newspeak)
> >> .pdf drafts somewhere else, but it's doable.
> >>
> >> I can take care to set it up, if it's clear what kind of CI/CD we want.
>
> > Is the current publishing system really that difficult?
>
> No, it's not that bad, it's just that there likely won't be a service
> that'll work out of the box with GitHub integration like readthedocs...
>
> > To my grizzled ears, this sounds like you're fishing for a volunteer
> > to translate LaTeX to ReST. I'd actually be willing to do that, as I
> > have plenty of experience with text transformations, but I'd need a
> > buy-in from everybody.
>
> ...but I wouldn't go as far as to suggest this is reason enough to
> translate the report into .rst
>
> I guess I was rather trying to fish for some commitment that we want in
> fact to stay with LaTeX; I was planning to pick up where I left things
> in 2015 and clean up/refactor the TeX text and also investigate what our
> current options are to generate state-of-the-art .pdf, .html and .epub
> output. And I'd like to avoid this resulting a waste of effort in case
> we decide to move away from LaTeX in the foreseeable future...
>
> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
> documentation system?
>
> -- hvr
> ___
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime@haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
>
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Herbert Valerio Riedel]

Hello *,

On 2017-09-08 at 00:46:52 +0200, Mario Blazevic wrote:

[...]

>> If the report was written in reStructuredText we could simply use
>> something like the readthedocs.org service. But since it's LaTeX, we
>> have to do a little bit more work to publishes ("deploys" in newspeak)
>> .pdf drafts somewhere else, but it's doable.
>>
>> I can take care to set it up, if it's clear what kind of CI/CD we want.

> Is the current publishing system really that difficult?

No, it's not that bad, it's just that there likely won't be a service
that'll work out of the box with GitHub integration like readthedocs...

> To my grizzled ears, this sounds like you're fishing for a volunteer
> to translate LaTeX to ReST. I'd actually be willing to do that, as I
> have plenty of experience with text transformations, but I'd need a
> buy-in from everybody.

...but I wouldn't go as far as to suggest this is reason enough to
translate the report into .rst

I guess I was rather trying to fish for some commitment that we want in
fact to stay with LaTeX; I was planning to pick up where I left things
in 2015 and clean up/refactor the TeX text and also investigate what our
current options are to generate state-of-the-art .pdf, .html and .epub
output. And I'd like to avoid this resulting a waste of effort in case
we decide to move away from LaTeX in the foreseeable future...

Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
documentation system?

-- hvr
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Remove eq and show from num class

[Sven Panne]

2017-09-08 10:43 GMT+02:00 Herbert Valerio Riedel :

> [...] Moreover, the CLC together with the Hackage Trustees also maintains
> the
> https://github.com/haskell/pvp specification which is integral to the
> way Hackage and the Cabal solver interact. [...]
>

Although I'm actively following quite a few Haskell-related mailing lists
and maintain various Haskell packages, this is the first time in my life
that I've heard of https://pvp.haskell.org/. It would be good to improve
communication about such central pieces of information... :-/ Don't get me
wrong: The page itself is great, as are other pages/repos/mailing lists,
but the overall organization of information leaves a lot to be desired IMHO.

Cheers,
   S.
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime