On 17 December 2011 05:39, Gregory Crosswhite gcrosswh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 17, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Thomas Schilling wrote:
Wll... I've gotten a little bit of a different perspective on this
since working at a company with very high code quality standards (at
least for new code).
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Sean Leather leat...@cs.uu.nl wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:07, Niklas Broberg wrote:
Envisioned: The function you ask for can definitely be written for
haskell-src-exts, which I know you are currently using. I just need to
complete my type checker for
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Thomas Schilling
nomin...@googlemail.comwrote:
What exactly are the hopes for such a type checker? I can understand
it being interesting as a research project, but as a realistic tools
there are two huge issues:
1. It's going to take a LOT of time to reach
On 16 December 2011 17:44, Niklas Broberg niklas.brob...@gmail.com wrote:
With all due respect, the sentiments you give voice to here are a large part
of what drives me to do this project in the first place. Haskell is not GHC,
and I think that the very dominant position of GHC many times leads
On Dec 17, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Thomas Schilling wrote:
Wll... I've gotten a little bit of a different perspective on this
since working at a company with very high code quality standards (at
least for new code). There is practically no observable code review
happening. I'm sure Dimitrios
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:07, Niklas Broberg wrote:
Envisioned: The function you ask for can definitely be written for
haskell-src-exts, which I know you are currently using. I just need to
complete my type checker for haskell-src-exts first. Which is not a small
task, but one that has been
What exactly are the hopes for such a type checker? I can understand
it being interesting as a research project, but as a realistic tools
there are two huge issues:
1. It's going to take a LOT of time to reach feature parity with
GHC's type checker.
2. Assuming that can be done, how is it
