Simon Peyton-Jones
Cc: johan.tib...@gmail.com; Don Stewart; Duncan Coutts; Roman Leshchinskiy;
ash...@semantic.org; cabal-devel@haskell.org; Ben Lippmeier; Manuel M T
Chakravarty; cvs-...@haskell.org
Subject: Re: deprecating
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
mailto
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 04:53:32PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> See my response on http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/6032#comment:6
> Not sure what the best path is here
FWIW, I agree with Simon.
And even if Rank2Types /is/ left as a permanent alias, I don't see a
reason not to mak
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> Do you mean “silently and forever”? Deprecation simply means that
> everything continues to work, but you get a little nudge to change. Isn’t
> that what it’s for? If you treat deprecation as equivalent to error, then
> there isn’t m
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 09:38:44AM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
> wrote:
> > As discussed in Trac #6032 I am deprecating
> >
> > Rank2Types
> >
> > PolymorphicComponents
> >
> > in favour of the single flag
> >
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> Dear maintainers of
>
> bytestring
>
> cabal
>
> vector
>
> time
>
> dph
>
Hi, Simon -
How did you come up with this list? It is missing the vast majority of
users of Rank2Types.
Most people embed languag
| > It's an interesting question: does Rank2Types mean "I require at
| > least
| > rank-2 types" or "I only use rank-2 types"?
|
| I think it means "I require at least rank-2 types".
|
| To clarify, I think it's OK if a compiler accepts a program marked
| "Rank2Types" and incorrectly not
On 22/10/2012 19:15, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
On 22.10.2012 11:05, Johan Tibell wrote:
I think it's OK if a compiler accepts a program incorrectly marked
"Rank2Types" when it actually requires rank-n types?
It's an interesting question: does Rank2Types mean "I require at least
rank-2 types" or "
On 23/10/2012 09:04, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
Do you mean “silently and forever�?
I think that's what I mean, yes.
As Johan notes, many of us run our continuous builds of our packages with
-Wall -Werro
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> I think it's OK if a compiler accepts a program incorrectly marked
> "Rank2Types" when it actually requires rank-n types?
It's an interesting question: does Rank2Types mean "I require at least
rank-2 types" or "I only use rank-2 types"?
_
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> But if the will of the masses is to silently and forever make
> Rank2Types=RankNtypes (documented of course), that's ok with me. It just
> seems odd. I thought that's what deprecation was *for*.
>
An alternative would be to have a mec
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> Do you mean “silently and forever”?
>
I think that's what I mean, yes.
As Johan notes, many of us run our continuous builds of our packages with
-Wall -Werror in order to keep them as clean as possible. Introducing a
deprecation thus
| -Original Message-
| > | From: Johan Tibell [mailto:johan.tib...@gmail.com]
| > | Sent: 19 October 2012 17:39
| > | To: Simon Peyton-Jones
| > | Cc: Don Stewart; Duncan Coutts; Roman Leshchinskiy;
| > | ash...@semantic.org; cabal-devel@haskell.org; Ben Lippmeier; Manuel
Leshchinskiy;
| ash...@semantic.org; cabal-devel@haskell.org; Ben Lippmeier; Manuel M T
| Chakravarty; cvs-...@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: deprecating
|
| Hi Simon,
|
| On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
| wrote:
| > As discussed in Trac #6032 I am deprecat
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> As discussed in Trac #6032 I am deprecating
>
> Rank2Types
>
> PolymorphicComponents
>
> in favour of the single flag
>
> RankNTypes
I'm fine with making the changes to cabal, but before I do, I
14 matches
Mail list logo
