From marlowsd at gmail.com Thu Jun 1 08:33:57 2017 From: marlowsd at gmail.com (Simon Marlow) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 09:33:57 +0100 Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Status In-Reply-To: <1495678514.16457.3.camel@joachim-breitner.de> References: <1495678514.16457.3.camel@joachim-breitner.de> Message-ID: On 25 May 2017 at 03:15, Joachim Breitner wrote: > [Please do not reply to this mail discussing individual proposals. > Instead, reply to the appropriate thread, or start a new one.] > > Hi, > > just another status update: > > We just rejected the instance force proposal. > > Open at the moment are: > > Eval class > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/27 > Shepherd: Richard > Status: This came back after being sent to the author for revision. > We are waiting for Richard to make a new decision suggestion. > > UNPACK on function arguments > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/46 > Shepherd: Simon Marlow > Status: Awaiting a recommendation from Simon > > I did make a recommendation, but that prompted further discussion on github. Should we put the proposal back in the discussion state? Cheers Simon > > Greetings, > Joachim > > -- > Joachim “nomeata” Breitner > mail at joachim-breitner.de • https://www.joachim-breitner.de/ > XMPP: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de • OpenPGP-Key: 0xF0FBF51F > Debian Developer: nomeata at debian.org > _______________________________________________ > ghc-steering-committee mailing list > ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at joachim-breitner.de Thu Jun 1 14:48:46 2017 From: mail at joachim-breitner.de (Joachim Breitner) Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 10:48:46 -0400 Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Status In-Reply-To: References: <1495678514.16457.3.camel@joachim-breitner.de> Message-ID: <1496328526.12970.1.camel@joachim-breitner.de> Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 01.06.2017, 09:33 +0100 schrieb Simon Marlow: > > UNPACK on function arguments > > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/46 > > Shepherd: Simon Marlow > > Status: Awaiting a recommendation from Simon > > > > I did make a recommendation, but that prompted further discussion on > github.  Should we put the proposal back in the discussion state? yes, if the proposal has a potential to improve this way, this would make sense. Let the proposer know clearly that the ball is back on his side then. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim “nomeata” Breitner   mail at joachim-breitner.de • https://www.joachim-breitner.de/   XMPP: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de • OpenPGP-Key: 0xF0FBF51F   Debian Developer: nomeata at debian.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: