The GHC 8.0 feature freeze is coming

Alan & Kim Zimmerman alan.zimm at
Fri Dec 4 14:12:43 UTC 2015

Well, its a feature freeze, not a release, so I imagine bugs can still
be fixed as they come up.


On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Luite Stegeman <stegeman at> wrote:
> Oh I don't want to block anything from being merged, if anything I'd like to
> see it get added and actually use the new intrastructure. Unfortunately it
> looks like I already need some hook changes to make GHCJSi work reasonably
> well, without having to copy/paste huge loads of GHC code into GHCJS, but
> it'd feel a bit silly to add hooks for something where a proper solution is
> already in place. So I would like to try to update GHCJS to use this, if
> there's a good chance that this gets merged.
> I just hope that I have enough time to do all of this and verify that things
> work before the freeze. It's a bit unfortunate that I can only be really
> sure when I actually have things running, and there's always a lot of work
> involved in updating GHCJS and its dependencies to work with GHC HEAD, with
> many big changes always landing right before the freeze.
> cheers,
> Luite
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 5:50 PM Simon Marlow <marlowsd at> wrote:
>> On 03/12/2015 13:50, Ben Gamari wrote:
>> > Luite Stegeman <stegeman at> writes:
>> >
>> >> Is Simon's remote GHCi patch planned to go in before the fork? I'm
>> >> still
>> >> working on upgrading GHCJS to work with the master branch, but I
>> >> haven't
>> >> quite finished yet. This change would clearly require some
>> >> restructuring of
>> >> GHCJSi and Template Haskell in GHCJS, and I'm not sure if a week is
>> >> enough
>> >> to test the changes. Also the recent removal of boot file merging
>> >> reintroduces a problem with that I'm not sure can be fixed without
>> >> adding a
>> >> new hook.
>> >>
>> > Simon, what do you think about this?
>> >
>> > I'm a bit worried that this patch is quite late and breaks users like
>> > Luite. Nevertheless, I am willing to hear arguments for merging.
>> It doesn't have to go in, but I think it would be nice.  I'd like to
>> have it out for at least one major release in a disabled-by-default
>> state so that we can experiment with it.  But as far as my particular
>> goals for this feature are concerned, I'll backport the patch to 7.10
>> and use it in our local GHC build at Facebook regardless.
>> Luite - the hooks you use are still intact, so I don't think you have to
>> do any major restructuring in GHCJS until you're ready.  What I've
>> implemented will almost certainly need work to be usable or shareable
>> with GHCJS, and it's not clear to me exactly what the changes will look
>> like, but for the time being I thought the changes should not impact
>> GHCJS's implementation of TH & GHCi.  I could be wrong though, if so
>> please let me know how it breaks you.
>> Cheers,
>> Simon
>> >> What's the policy on adding hooks or GHC API tweaks after the freeze?
>> >>
>> > We'll need to work that out when we get to that point. It largely
>> > depends upon how confined and "safe" a change appears to be. That being
>> > said, given how much other churn has happened for this release, I don't
>> > think we want to be sloppy with merge discipline this time around.
>> >
>> > Austin, what do you think?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > - Ben
>> >
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list