Re: Proposal: NoImplicitPreludeImport

2013-06-04 Thread Manuel M T Chakravarty
Ian Lynagh : > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:15:58PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: >> >> If a module contains an import of the form >> >> import Prelude.XYZ >> >> then it also automatically uses the NoImplicitPrelude language pragma. >> Otherwise, the Prelude remains to be implicitly defin

Re: Proposal: NoImplicitPreludeImport

2013-06-04 Thread Ian Lynagh
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:15:58PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: > > If a module contains an import of the form > > import Prelude.XYZ > > then it also automatically uses the NoImplicitPrelude language pragma. > Otherwise, the Prelude remains to be implicitly defined as before. What a

Re: Proposal: NoImplicitPreludeImport

2013-06-04 Thread Ian Lynagh
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:06:25PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > > Hardly anybody uses haskell98 or haskell2010, so we would still have > a backwards compatibility problem. I meant 'base' to be included in 'these packages'; I've clarified the wiki page. Thanks Ian -- Ian Lynagh, Haskell Consult

Re: Proposal: NoImplicitPreludeImport

2013-06-04 Thread Simon Marlow
On 28/05/13 17:08, Ian Lynagh wrote: On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 08:58:29AM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote: The likely practical result of this is that every module will now read: module M where #if MIN_VERSION_base(x,y,z) import Prelude #else import Data.Num import Control.Monad ... #endif for the n