GHC 9.0?

[Takenobu Tani]

There is also major change of the GHC API structure by Sylvain :)

Regards,
Takenobu

On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 10:01 AM Ben Gamari <ben at smart-cactus.org> wrote:
>
> On July 17, 2020 6:51:25 PM EDT, Moritz Angermann <moritz.angermann at gmail.com> wrote:
> >Can’t dependent haskell be 10?
> >
> >On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 1:09 AM, Alan & Kim Zimmerman
> ><alan.zimm at gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I have to admit this thought had crossed my mind too.
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >> On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 17:11, Brandon Allbery <allbery.b at gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> That's likely to be a fairly long wait, as i understand it.
> >>>
> >>> On 7/17/20, chessai <chessai1996 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > I always thought that we were waiting for -XDependentHaskell
> >before we
> >>> went
> >>> > to 9. That's just been my impression though; no one has has ever
> >said
> >>> that,
> >>> > AFAIK. Perhaps it is wrong.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020, 9:04 AM Krzysztof Gogolewski
> >>> > <krz.gogolewski at gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> There is an exceptional number of changes stated for the next
> >release.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> * Better pattern matching coverage detection
> >>> >> * New windows IO manager
> >>> >> * Linear types
> >>> >> * Large-scale typechecker changes - Taming the Kind Inference
> >Monster,
> >>> >> simplified subsumption
> >>> >> * Better register allocation, improving runtime by 0.8% according
> >to
> >>> >> release notes
> >>> >> * ghc-bignum
> >>> >> * Explicit specificity and eager instantiation
> >>> >> * Qualified do
> >>> >> * Lexical negation
> >>> >> * Perhaps Quick Look will manage to land
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Should we call it GHC 9.0? I think the name would be deserved.
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> ghc-devs mailing list
> >>> >> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> >>> >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> brandon s allbery kf8nh
> >>> allbery.b at gmail.com
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> ghc-devs mailing list
> >>> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ghc-devs mailing list
> >> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> >>
>
> No objection from me. Indeed it has been a while since we had a supermajor bump and linear types is quite a significant feature.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Ben
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs