the Word type

[Simon Marlow]

=20
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 11:08:15AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > Alastair wrote:
> > > I've argued for its complete removal from the libraries=20
> because the
> > > vast majority of the code written with it will be non-portable.  I
> > > think the counter-argument was that some portable usages=20
> are possible
> > > with one of Chris Okasaki's data structures being an example.
> > >=20
> > > So, at least for now, it remains alive and well in the=20
> Hugs code in
> > > the interests of GHC-compatability and backwards-compatability.
> > >=20
> > > Hopefully the comments in the Hugs source code (which=20
> were probably
> > > added by me) match the above.
> >=20
> > I think it's there for symmetry, not much else.  Word=20
> suffers from the
> > same problems as Int, so while we have one we might as well have the
> > other.
>=20
> OK, the question is whether Hugs should provide it with a full set of
> instances, including Storable, and allow it as a foreign type.

Well, if the prevailing opinion is that it shouldn't be in the
libraries, then we can move it to GHC.Word.  If it stays in the
libraries, then Hugs should implement it.

I don't have any strong feelings either way, but perhaps a slight
prefernce for keeping it.  I don't think any of the libraries actually
use it.

Cheers,
	Simon