Re: Default module header `module Main where`
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Joachim Breitner wrote: > I thought about this. But I fear that this will require a language > extension or flag, and then the developers (quite rightly) say that it > does not pull its weight of supporting both variants, and it gets lost. > But maybe I should give it a shot if they accept it. Indeed this strikes me as a not a good extension to have: every extension further fragments the ecosystem and is yet another thing to care about if you are reading someone else's code, etc. - the cost probably outweights the benefit on this one. But it seems a good proposal for H2020, as (if it is accepted), the costs linked with an extension/flag (added complexity, fragmentation of the community) aren't there. The "extensions before report modification" is a solid rule, maybe the committee wants to add an exception for proposals which cannot realistically be "packaged" (and achieve widespread use) into extensions? ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Re: Haskell 2020: 'let' to be optional and with wider scope of visibility, like other Haskell functions
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 08:21:43PM +0300, Vassil Ognyanov Keremidchiev wrote: > Okay, sorry for taking your time about those propositions. I'm just > thinking of ways for improving future Haskell. My feedback is mostly from > talking with people and trying to teach them in Haskell. As others, I am not convinced with the proposal (given the amount of boxes marked "Translation" in the Haskell report, I wish we had a standard way to handling syntactic rewrites; it could come handy in yours and many more cases). But I am interested in newcomers and their introduction to the language: did they get confused by `let` or just pointed it out as superfluous? ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Re: Multiple imports on a single line
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:18:13PM +0200, Vassil Ognyanov Keremidchiev wrote: > Hello! > > What do you think about an idea to have multiple imports on a single line, > like: > > module MyApp where > import Data.Text, Data.Foldable, Control.Concurrent > ... Hello Vassil, how would qualified/as work? Would import statement like this: import Data.Text, qualified Data.Foldable as F, Control.Concurrent be allowed? ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Re: New Github features and Haskell Prime
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 10:09:56AM +0900, Matthias Fischmann wrote: > just to be clarify for those who are still interested: i'm not > suggesting we should *change* the process as much as *extend* it. > once the committee has finalized haskell-prime, ask everybody > (literally everybody) for a boolean. I am pretty sure that everybody in this thread already knows, but just to clarify how Scheme proceeded: the vote was held on the mailing list and a template was given, like Name: Location: Organisation (optional): Contact (optional): Vote: Rationale: As you would expect the quality of voting (example [1]) was much much higher than "1 like = 1 monad". [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20140601050807/http://lists.scheme-reports.org/pipermail/scheme-reports/2013-April/003310.html ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Re: Merging RFC pull requests
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 07:33:41PM +0200, David Luposchainsky via Haskell-prime wrote: > The idea is that people talk about the proposals in the comments, and if we > come > to an agreement on a proposal, we merge the PR. This isn’t set in stone, but I > felt like someone should get some form of process started, so I took a look at > how Rust is doing it, and here we are. :-) I suppose the repository link is https://github.com/haskell/rfcs ! Since the only mention on this list is from a mail by Herbert Valerio Riedel (31 May 2016), you might want to make it 'official' by announcing it here/on haskell@h.o ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Re: Infrastructure & Communication
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:56:51PM +0200, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > One benefit I see from using GitHub is that this way would we be closer > to the Haskell community (given the majority of Hackage packages are > hosted on GitHub), and our work would be more transparent for the > community as well as offering a lower barrier to > participation/contribution. > > Moreover, I think GitHub would also help make our efforts/progress > towards a revised Haskell Report more visible to the community, which in > turn may even provide us the motivation to carry on... Hello, personally I would be more likely to read/participate in the discussions if such discussions were hosted here or on Trac rather than Github. haskell-prime@ is just one 'subscribe' away, comes in a familiar package to haskell-cafe@ participants (a mailing list) and interface (their mail client); I cannot say the same about Github. Similarly, Trac allows me to follow new issues (new tickets notifications or the life of a single ticket in particular) via rss, without having to register to a new service. Of course: 1. this is just my experience -- there are many haskell developers on Github and they probably like the workflow there (I would still say the haskell-cafe@ audience is bigger though). 2. I am not a committee member. In the end it's them who are going to pour blood/sweat/tears in the report; whichever tool the committee chooses is the right one signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
