[ghc-steering-committee] Remove TypeOperators => NoStarIsType "migration" (#146); Recommendation: accept

[Richard Eisenberg]

It's nice when experience guides us.

+1

> On Jun 26, 2018, at 4:50 AM, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org> wrote:
> 
> I'm in favour.
> 
> Simon
> 
> |  -----Original Message-----
> |  From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org> On
> |  Behalf Of Manuel M T Chakravarty
> |  Sent: 26 June 2018 04:41
> |  To: Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com>
> |  Cc: ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> |  Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Remove TypeOperators => NoStarIsType
> |  "migration" (#146); Recommendation: accept
> |  
> |  +1
> |  
> |  > Am 26.06.2018 um 02:07 schrieb Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com>:
> |  >
> |  > Signierter PGP-Teil
> |  > Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com> writes:
> |  >
> |  >> Hi everyone,
> |  >>
> |  > ...
> |  >>
> |  >> The proposed amendment removes TypeOperator's implication of
> |  >> NoStarIsType. To be clear, this is ultimately a trade-off between
> |  >> optimising for users of (*) as a binary operator and users of * ~ Type.
> |  >> It just so happens that there are far more of the latter.
> |  >> Consequently, my recommendation is to accept the modified proposal.
> |  >>
> |  > Given that this is (hopefully) a relatively uncontroversial change, my
> |  > plan is to move ahead with issuing alpha 1 with the new NoStarIsType
> |  > semantics on Wednesday. If anyone on the committee feels strongly
> |  > about the issue and would prefer that I not do this do let me know
> |  > soon and we can discuss.
> |  >
> |  > Cheers,
> |  >
> |  > - Ben
> |  >
> |  >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee