From lists at richarde.dev  Mon Nov  1 21:10:21 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2021 21:10:21 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Proposal #281: Visible "forall" in
 terms; rec: accept
In-Reply-To: <D3C7E02D-16B3-48D3-8AEA-A7BD86CC0AA9@seidel.io>
References: <F0A41B07-7AD8-44D6-AC1C-EB2DB9AA1FD7@gmail.com>
 <D3C7E02D-16B3-48D3-8AEA-A7BD86CC0AA9@seidel.io>
Message-ID: <010f017cdd56bba0-dfb40d67-7151-40f3-9bc8-24187ec87003-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>

Proposal accepted.

Thanks, all!

> On Oct 29, 2021, at 6:20 PM, Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io> wrote:
> 
> Yes, to be absolutely clear, I’m ok with merging. 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Oct 29, 2021, at 18:06, Vladislav Zavialov (int-index) <vlad.z.4096 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> There’s indeed a similarity, but also some differences. Optional parameters are typically defaulted rather than inferred by unification, and they can be passed by name rather than by position. Both of those would be welcome additions to Haskell, y the way (at least in my opinion, surely this also would need a full proposal).
>> 
>> Those features wouldn’t be a replacement for visible forall, though, but an addition. So before we continue this discussion: what do we think of the proposal at hand?
>> 
>> Richard, you were planning to merge today. My interpretation of Eric’s position (correct me if I’m misrepresenting) is that there are some unfortunate consequences of the proposed design, but we are more or less forced into it by the SUP and other constraints, so there don’t appear to be any better alternatives.
>> 
>> Shall we pull the trigger?
>> 
>> - Vlad
>> 
>>> On 30 Oct 2021, at 00:17, Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021, at 13:56, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
>>>> 2. We would like some type arguments to be visible and some to be 
>>>> invisible. This is the nub of the motivation for #281.
>>> 
>>> Possibly a slight tangent, but if I were to replace every occurrence of "visible" with "required" and "invisible" with "optional", would that be a valid way of reading the discussion around visibility? For some reason the terminology has always been a bit confusing.
>>> 
>>> Veering off a bit further, if the above substitution is valid, would visibility give us a formalism to deal with optional *value* arguments? It's always bothered me that OCaml has optional/named parameters but Haskell does not.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>> 
> 


From mail at joachim-breitner.de  Fri Nov  5 17:40:41 2021
From: mail at joachim-breitner.de (Joachim Breitner)
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2021 18:40:41 +0100
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Away from a laptop
Message-ID: <17e1dcb339b2e8fbc1451f6adf4b10a2278a6b31.camel@joachim-breitner.de>

Dear committee,

I’ll be away from my laptop for a few weeks from Monday on, and might
be slow to do my secretary duties, and some things (like merging a
proposal with updating the metadata and possibly converting from .md to
.rst) are quite unwieldy to do just on a phone. If something can’t or
should not wait, I’d be grateful if others could cover for me.

Cheers,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/



From lists at richarde.dev  Wed Nov 10 19:27:05 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 19:27:05 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Away from a laptop
In-Reply-To: <17e1dcb339b2e8fbc1451f6adf4b10a2278a6b31.camel@joachim-breitner.de>
References: <17e1dcb339b2e8fbc1451f6adf4b10a2278a6b31.camel@joachim-breitner.de>
Message-ID: <010f017d0b516c9e-004e50fe-55bc-4e7e-81f6-8156165bf188-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>

I can sub in for a few weeks. Enjoy your travels!

Richard

> On Nov 5, 2021, at 1:40 PM, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de> wrote:
> 
> Dear committee,
> 
> I’ll be away from my laptop for a few weeks from Monday on, and might
> be slow to do my secretary duties, and some things (like merging a
> proposal with updating the metadata and possibly converting from .md to
> .rst) are quite unwieldy to do just on a phone. If something can’t or
> should not wait, I’d be grateful if others could cover for me.
> 
> Cheers,
> Joachim
> 
> -- 
> Joachim Breitner
>  mail at joachim-breitner.de
>  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee


From lists at richarde.dev  Fri Nov 19 19:22:52 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 19:22:52 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #452: Articulate principles
 for GHC evolution; Shepherd: Simon PJ
Message-ID: <010f017d39a6cada-4348acaa-e469-432b-a4c3-7a2e1c23b6ff-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>

Dear Committee,

This is your interim secretary speaking:

Articulate principles for GHC evolution, proposing a new "principles" document to be added to the proposals repo, has been proposed by me.
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/452
https://github.com/goldfirere/ghc-proposals/blob/principles/principles.rst

I propose Simon PJ as the shepherd, as this is something of a meta-proposal, appropriate for shepherding by our chair.

Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in 
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process>

Thanks,
Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20211119/a3c40723/attachment.html>

From lists at richarde.dev  Fri Nov 19 19:30:04 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 19:30:04 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #451: Sized literals
	proposal; Shepherd: Simon M
Message-ID: <010f017d39ad63fd-db81ebeb-38ee-4325-bbf7-e7e8941d2f79-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>

Dear Committee,

This is your interim secretary speaking:

Sized literals proposal, proposing syntax for literals for the new sized primitive numeric types, has been proposed by Sylvain Henry.

https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/451
https://github.com/hsyl20/ghc-proposals/blob/sized-literals/proposals/0000-sized-literals.rst

I propose Simon M as the shepherd.

Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in 
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process

Thanks,
Richard

From arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io  Mon Nov 22 07:45:55 2021
From: arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io (Spiwack, Arnaud)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 08:45:55 +0100
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Local module proposal on hiatus
Message-ID: <CAH6fHQk0V_chuBHf3X4rrSXr=JVQxDJAyzTdgPkETmdEO1-53Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Richard has decided to stop working on the local module proposal [
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/283#issuecomment-974382367
].

Just as I was about to say that we ought to accept it unless a strong
opposition was voiced within the next two weeks. What's left to do, as far
as anyone can tell, is address two minor technical points (there may be
other corner cases that have been missed: it's an ambitious proposal after
all; but it's looking like it's standing on firm ground).

I've stated previously that I care a lot about this proposal.
Unfortunately, I currently don't have time to take care of the proposal
myself. I may revisit this decision in 2022 (which, fortunately, is rather
soon), depending on how my schedule changes. But until then, unless someone
steps up, I'll mark the proposal as dormant.

Best,
Arnaud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20211122/db45869d/attachment.html>

From simonpj at microsoft.com  Mon Nov 22 09:28:14 2021
From: simonpj at microsoft.com (Simon Peyton Jones)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:28:14 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] [EXTERNAL] Local module proposal on
 hiatus
In-Reply-To: <CAH6fHQk0V_chuBHf3X4rrSXr=JVQxDJAyzTdgPkETmdEO1-53Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH6fHQk0V_chuBHf3X4rrSXr=JVQxDJAyzTdgPkETmdEO1-53Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM9PR83MB04836F2B2AF822D7DFB5DBE6AD9F9@AM9PR83MB0483.EURPRD83.prod.outlook.com>

In my mind the trouble is that it's a "big" proposal, with far-reaching consequences.   I too am strongly attracted by it.  But I am also a bit daunted by the engineering costs of adopting it.   (E.g. we have not begun to talk about Backpack or HLS.)

So, much as like it, I'm not upset about it going to sleep for a bit.

If some sponsor wanted to adopt it, and resource the development of the proposal and its implementation, as Tweag did for linear types (another "big" proposal), that would shift the calculus a bit.   We could wait to see if/when that happens.

Simon

PS: I am leaving Microsoft at the end of November 2021, at which point simonpj at microsoft.com<mailto:simonpj at microsoft.com> will cease to work.  Use simon.peytonjones at gmail.com<mailto:simon.peytonjones at gmail.com> instead.  (For now, it just forwards to simonpj at microsoft.com.)

From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org> On Behalf Of Spiwack, Arnaud
Sent: 22 November 2021 07:46
To: Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ghc-steering-committee] Local module proposal on hiatus

Dear all,

Richard has decided to stop working on the local module proposal [ https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/283#issuecomment-974382367<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fghc-proposals%2Fghc-proposals%2Fpull%2F283%23issuecomment-974382367&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Caa4a1fd4d218456d6e7908d9ad8c8220%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637731642364656180%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=ldiWT%2BmS6SoUfFp9jOqNSmEYoPgB0OgpIozjztHUIp8%3D&reserved=0> ].

Just as I was about to say that we ought to accept it unless a strong opposition was voiced within the next two weeks. What's left to do, as far as anyone can tell, is address two minor technical points (there may be other corner cases that have been missed: it's an ambitious proposal after all; but it's looking like it's standing on firm ground).

I've stated previously that I care a lot about this proposal. Unfortunately, I currently don't have time to take care of the proposal myself. I may revisit this decision in 2022 (which, fortunately, is rather soon), depending on how my schedule changes. But until then, unless someone steps up, I'll mark the proposal as dormant.

Best,
Arnaud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20211122/12af0081/attachment.html>

From lists at richarde.dev  Mon Nov 22 16:03:32 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 16:03:32 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] [EXTERNAL] Local module proposal on
 hiatus
In-Reply-To: <AM9PR83MB04836F2B2AF822D7DFB5DBE6AD9F9@AM9PR83MB0483.EURPRD83.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAH6fHQk0V_chuBHf3X4rrSXr=JVQxDJAyzTdgPkETmdEO1-53Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM9PR83MB04836F2B2AF822D7DFB5DBE6AD9F9@AM9PR83MB0483.EURPRD83.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <010f017d48636199-61cd77d6-f7ea-4da1-a1c5-ada38cb697b1-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>



> On Nov 22, 2021, at 4:28 AM, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org> wrote:
> 
> If some sponsor wanted to adopt it, and resource the development of the proposal and its implementation, as Tweag did for linear types (another “big” proposal), that would shift the calculus a bit.   We could wait to see if/when that happens.

Yes, that seems about right. Though I originally thought I would get the proposal through the door, I knew I would not be the implementor, so the job was never going to be finished by me, anyway. Perhaps it makes sense for someone committed to do the implementation to finish it off.

The key thing for me is that there were several other proposals in this space, and I just thought there was a better design. I do think the design there is mostly good, with details to be filled in later.

Thanks,
Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20211122/d1d4dfdd/attachment.html>

From i.am.tom.harding at gmail.com  Tue Nov 30 13:37:42 2021
From: i.am.tom.harding at gmail.com (Tom Harding)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 13:37:42 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee]  #433: the Unsatisfiable constraint;
 recommendation: accept
Message-ID: <0DE2BE2C-83C4-46CC-9A58-8D7E0E023748@gmail.com>

Hi all,

Since I last emailed the committee, Adam has split the proposal into two parts: one for `Unsatisfiable` and one for `Warning`. I think I’m right in saying that everyone who has voiced an opinion has been in favour of the `Unsatisfiable` half, so if no one has any further thoughts, I suggest we accept this half and continue discussing `Warning` later on.

Thanks,
Tom

From lists at richarde.dev  Tue Nov 30 17:53:50 2021
From: lists at richarde.dev (Richard Eisenberg)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:53:50 +0000
Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] #433: the Unsatisfiable constraint;
 recommendation: accept
In-Reply-To: <0DE2BE2C-83C4-46CC-9A58-8D7E0E023748@gmail.com>
References: <0DE2BE2C-83C4-46CC-9A58-8D7E0E023748@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <010f017d71fb3cdb-da54c83c-5997-4b11-8f4a-c4093c0a335d-000000@us-east-2.amazonses.com>

+1

> On Nov 30, 2021, at 8:37 AM, Tom Harding <i.am.tom.harding at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Since I last emailed the committee, Adam has split the proposal into two parts: one for `Unsatisfiable` and one for `Warning`. I think I’m right in saying that everyone who has voiced an opinion has been in favour of the `Unsatisfiable` half, so if no one has any further thoughts, I suggest we accept this half and continue discussing `Warning` later on.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee