<div dir="ltr">This never bothered me personally, but I have no strong feeling about it either way. </div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:30 AM Vitaly Bragilevsky <<a href="mailto:bravit111@gmail.com">bravit111@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hello, <div><br></div><div>I am in favor of this proposal. As for the name of the extension, my suggestion is 'FlexibleImports', then we could allow even more flexibility in import declarations in the future. Anyway, I am also ok with the current versions (although the shorter the better).</div><div><br></div><div>Regards, </div><div>Vitaly<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:32 AM Simon Marlow <<a href="mailto:marlowsd@gmail.com" target="_blank">marlowsd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Proposal #190 is about accepting the syntax</div><div><br></div><div> import A.B.C qualified</div><div><br></div><div>instead of (or in addition to) the existing syntax</div><div><br></div><div> import qualified A.B.C</div><div><br></div><div>I think it's widely accepted that the original syntax was a mistake. I don't need to rehash the rationale for the change here, iit's described pretty well in the proposal and elaborated in the discussion.</div><div><br></div><div>The question for us is really: is it worth changing? There are costs:</div><div>- A new extension flag, which itself has costs (extra documentation, a new thing that people need to understand)</div><div>- new code using the extension doesn't compile with older compilers</div><div>- all the existing code in the world uses the old convention</div><div>- etc.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Reasonable people can differ here. The discussion on the proposal has representatives from both sides of the camp.</div><div><br></div><div>Personally, the current syntax annoys me almost every day. It's already a small cost on everyone, and I think we need to move forwards even if there are costs in migrating. So, I'm going to recommend that we accept this proposal.</div><div><br></div><div>We might want to reconsider the name of the extension: <code>QualifiedImportsPostpositive seems like a mouthful. Perhaps ImportQualifiedPost is enough?</code></div><div><code><br></code></div><div><code>Cheers</code></div><div><code>Simon</code></div><div><code><br></code></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 4 Mar 2019 at 12:09, Joachim Breitner <<a href="mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de" target="_blank">mail@joachim-breitner.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear Committee,<br>
<br>
this is your secretary speaking:<br>
<br>
Module qualified syntax<br>
has been proposed by Shayne Fletcher<br>
<a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/190" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/190</a><br>
<a href="https://github.com/shayne-fletcher-da/ghc-proposals/blob/module-qualified-syntax/proposals/0000-module-qualified-syntax.rst" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/shayne-fletcher-da/ghc-proposals/blob/module-qualified-syntax/proposals/0000-module-qualified-syntax.rst</a><br>
<br>
Simon Marlow has already volunteered to shepherd.<br>
<br>
Please reach consensus as described in<br>
<a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process</a><br>
I suggest you make a recommendation, in a new e-mail thread with the<br>
proposal number in the subject, about the decision, maybe point out<br>
debatable points, and assume that anyone who stays quiet agrees with<br>
you.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Joachim<br>
-- <br>
Joachim Breitner<br>
<a href="mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de" target="_blank">mail@joachim-breitner.de</a><br>
<a href="http://www.joachim-breitner.de/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.joachim-breitner.de/</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div>