> Henrik Nilsson writes:
> So before breaking anything more, that being code, research papers, books,
> what people have learned, or even the community itself, it is time to very
> carefully think about what the appropriate processes should be for going
> forward.
Hi Henrik,
I'd really like
Hello,
On 2015-10-21 at 02:39:57 +0200, Geoffrey Mainland wrote:
[...]
> In effect, only those who actively follow the libraries list have had a
> voice in these decisions. Maybe that is what the community wants. I hope
> not. How then can people like me (and Henrik and Graham) have a say
> with
n; Gershom B
Cc: henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk; haskell-prime@haskell.org List; Graham
Hutton; Haskell Libraries; haskell cafe
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving
`return` out of `Monad`
Hi all,
Geoffrey Mainland wrote;
> What worries me most is that we
Hi all,
Geoffrey Mainland wrote;
> What worries me most is that we have started to see very valuable
> members of our community publicly state that they are reducing their
> community involvement.
That worries me too. A lot. To quote myself from an earlier
e-mail in this thread:
> Therefore, p
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Bardur Arantsson
wrote:
> Please consider that the the way practical development really happens[2]
...among web developers, who of course are the only real developers?
Have you considered that there are developers who are not web developers?
The past day has con
On 10/07/2015 10:54 PM, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
> That the new Haskell' committee is being spearheaded by the
> apparently-untiring HVR [...]
Sorry, I should have continued: ... and hopefully joined by some
motivated, skilled and experienced individuals if the self-nominations
are anything to go b
On 10/07/2015 12:56 AM, José Manuel Calderón Trilla wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I agree with Henrik, I'm very keen on giving the new Haskell committee a
> shot.
>
> While some may not think that Haskell2010 was a success, I think it would
> be difficult to argue that Haskell98 was anything but a reso
Hello all,
I agree with Henrik, I'm very keen on giving the new Haskell committee a
shot.
While some may not think that Haskell2010 was a success, I think it would
be difficult to argue that Haskell98 was anything but a resounding success
(even if you don't think the language was what it could ha
On 2015-10-06 at 14:06:11 +0200, Erik Hesselink wrote:
> I was always under the impression that +1/-1 was just a quick
> indicator of opinion, not a vote, and that it was the core libraries
> committee that would make the final call if enough consensus was
> reached to enact the change.
I'd like t
@haskell.org List; Haskell Libraries; haskell cafe
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving
`return` out of `Monad`
Dear all,
Executive Summary: Please let us defer further discussion and ultimate decision
on MRP to the resurrected HaskellPrime committee
While we can
On 2015-10-05 at 21:01:16 +0200, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Gregory Collins
[...]
>> Strongly -1 from me also. My experience over the last couple of years is
>> that every GHC release breaks my libraries in annoying ways that require
>> CPP to fix:
>>
>> ~/personal/src/
Dear all,
Executive Summary: Please let us defer further discussion
and ultimate decision on MRP to the resurrected HaskellPrime
committee
While we can discuss the extent of additional breakage
MRP would cause, the fact remains it is a further
breaking change. A survey of breakage to books as
He
(Resending with smaller recipient list to avoid getting stuck in the
moderator queue.)
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> On 2015-10-05 at 21:01:16 +0200, Johan Tibell wrote:
> > On the libraries I maintain and have a copy of on my computer right now:
> 329
>
>
> Alt
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Adam Foltzer wrote:
>> Also I'm not sure if there would be less complaints if
>> AMP/FTP/MFP/MRP/etc as part of a new Haskell Report would be switched on all
>> at once in e.g. `base-5.0`, breaking almost *every* single package out there
>> at once.
>
> I doubt the
Sven Panne writes:
> If you take e.g. (<$>) which is now part of the Prelude, you can't
> simply import some compatibility module, because GHC might tell you
> (rightfully) that that import is redundant, because (<$>) is already
> visible through the Prelude.
Yes, the proper solution is slig
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Erik Hesselink wrote:
> On 5 October 2015 at 20:58, Sven Panne wrote:
> > 2015-10-05 17:09 GMT+02:00 Gershom B :
> >>
> >> [...] As for libraries, it has been pointed out, I believe, that without
> >> CPP one can write instances compatible with AMP, and also with
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Gregory Collins
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Gershom B wrote:
>
>> My understanding of the argument here, which seems to make sense to me,
>> is that the AMP already introduced a significant breaking change with
>> regards to monads. Books and lectur
2015-10-05 17:09 GMT+02:00 Gershom B :
> On October 5, 2015 at 10:59:35 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan (b...@serpentine.com)
> wrote:
> [...] As for libraries, it has been pointed out, I believe, that without
> CPP one can write instances compatible with AMP, and also with AMP + MRP.
> One can also write co
On October 5, 2015 at 10:59:35 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan (b...@serpentine.com) wrote:
> I would like to suggest that the bar for breaking all existing libraries,
> books, papers,
> and lecture notes should be very high; and that the benefit associated with
> such a breaking
> change should be corr
I would like to suggest that the bar for breaking all existing libraries,
books, papers, and lecture notes should be very high; and that the benefit
associated with such a breaking change should be correspondingly huge.
This proposal falls far short of both bars, to the extent that I am astonish
On October 5, 2015 at 6:00:00 AM, Simon Thompson (s.j.thomp...@kent.ac.uk)
wrote:
> Hello all. I write this to be a little provocative, but …
>
> It’s really interesting to have this discussion, which pulls in all sorts of
> well-made
> points about orthogonality, teaching, the evolution of t
On 2015-10-05 at 15:27:53 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
> 2015-10-05 11:59 GMT+02:00 Simon Thompson :
>
>> [...] It’s really interesting to have this discussion, which pulls in all
>> sorts of well-made points about orthogonality, teaching, the evolution of
>> the language and so on, but it simply goes
2015-10-05 11:59 GMT+02:00 Simon Thompson :
> [...] It’s really interesting to have this discussion, which pulls in all
> sorts of well-made points about orthogonality, teaching, the evolution of
> the language and so on, but it simply goes to show that the process of
> evolving Haskell is profoun
23 matches
Mail list logo
