[ghc-steering-committee] Proposal #170: Uppercase OverloadedLabels, rec: accept

[Eric Seidel]

I share Richard's concern about missing an opportunity to generalize OverloadedLabels even further. But let's also not lose sight of the fact that the proposal as-is is very sensible! So, if we cannot form a consensus around an even more general OverloadedLabels, we should at least accept the current proposal.

On Sun, Sep 30, 2018, at 21:57, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> I'm on the fence. As you'll see on the GitHub trail, I wonder if this 
> proposal doesn't go far enough. If we're going to generalize, let's go 
> as far as we can.
> 
> Richard
> 
> > On Sep 30, 2018, at 3:16 PM, Vitaly Bragilevsky <bravit111 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi all, 
> > 
> > As a shepherd to the proposal #170, Uppercase OverloadedLabels (https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/170 <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/170>) proposed by howtonotwin, I recommend acceptance. 
> > 
> > It is proposed to allow the string after # (with -XOverloadedLabels) to start uppercase thus looking like a constructor name in addition to a variable name as we have now.
> > 
> > The proposal is clear, there are no known pitfalls. I suggest having two weeks for discussion. Silence is understood as an an agreement with this recommendation.
> > 
> > Regards, 
> > Vitaly
> > _______________________________________________
> > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> > ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee