<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: -webkit-standard; font-size: medium;">As Joachim says, "</span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Programmers use extensions to _refer_ to a particular feature</span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> when talking/writing/searching about it."</span><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000"><br></font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000">I think this is generally important. The language reports provide the foundations for understanding the language and it is important to have a handle to describe the various departures from it -- at least until a new report around which near universal acceptance can be established. </font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000"><br></font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000">I would extend "</font>2. Restrict the use of more complex features" to say <font color="#000000">"</font>2. Restrict the use of _novel_ and more complex features". I think many just want to say exactly how they are departing from Haskell 2010, whether those deltas are complex or otherwise.</div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000"><br></font></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><font color="#000000">Chris <br></font></div><br></body></html>