<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">I have wanted this for many years.<div><br></div><div>I have one question which I put in the thread but it really should not get in the way of making things better -- let's iterate.</div><div><br></div><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">+1 from me.</span></div><div><font color="#000000"><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></span></font></div><div><font color="#000000"><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Chris<br></span></font><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 13 Feb 2023, at 01:45, Moritz Angermann <moritz.angermann@gmail.com> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div><div dir="auto">> <span style="word-spacing:1px;color:rgb(49,49,49)">On balance, I think we should accept this proposal and not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="word-spacing:1px;color:rgb(49,49,49)"><br></span></div></div><div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto">I agree with this. An incremental improvement is an improvement. And if need/interest/funding is there can be iterated upon.</div></div><div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"><br></div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"><span>On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 5:11 AM, Joachim Breitner <<a href="mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de" target="_blank">mail@joachim-breitner.de</a>> wrote:</span><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">Hi,<br>
<br>
Am Sonntag, dem 12.02.2023 um 14:01 -0500 schrieb Eric Seidel:<br>
> I have two minds about this proposal. On the one hand, it seems<br>
> likely to leave performance on the table compared to the alternatives<br>
> discussed. But on the other hand, this proposal has already been<br>
> implemented and validated by Well-Typed, and it seems like a small<br>
> amount of additional complexity for GHC to adapt. (Though I'd love<br>
> for someone with more knowledge of GHC internals to opine on the<br>
> internal complexity.)<br>
> <br>
> On balance, I think we should accept this proposal and not let the<br>
> perfect be the enemy of the good.<br>
<br>
I agree. Especially given that there is an implementation, I see no<br>
good reason why we shouldn’t trust the implementors and authors’s good<br>
sense in their design choices.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<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>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org<br>https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>