Enable TypeHoles by default?

[Dominique Devriese]

Perhaps already as part of such a feedback round/bikeshedding
opportunity, I'm wondering if I'm the only one who finds the name
"TypeHoles" confusing, since as far as I understand, the extension
enables holes in *expressions*, not types...  I would personally find
something like TypedHoles (note the added d) or ExpressionHoles or
something similar more intuitive. Not that I have strong feelings
about this, though...  Note that I haven't actually tried the
extension yet, but from the description, it seems like a very nice
addition to GHC, so kudos to whoever did the work...

Regards,
Dominique

2014/1/13 Richard Eisenberg <eir at cis.upenn.edu>:
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but how does specifying TypeHoles make GHC not compliant with Haskell 2010? Turning on TypeHoles should change only error messages. The set of programs that compile (and their meanings) should remain unchanged, by my understanding.
>
> I'm mildly in favor of this change, but I agree that perhaps a conversation on the users list and/or waiting a cycle isn't a bad idea.
>
> Richard
>
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 4:51 AM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/01/2014 22:56, Krzysztof Gogolewski wrote:
>>> I propose to enable -XTypeHoles in GHC by default.
>>
>> GHC supports strict Haskell 2010 by default, and enabling any extensions breaks that property.  That's why we don't have any extensions on by default.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>       Simon
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs