[ghc-steering-committee] Proposal #167 (Deprecated Entities): Request for comments

[Eric Seidel]

In https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/blob/master/proposals/0008-type-infix.rst we already have an approved alternative: "value".

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, at 17:50, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am Sonntag, den 03.02.2019, 10:45 -0500 schrieb Eric Seidel:
> > I'm more bothered by the fact that the data/constructor tag has now
> > become 'pattern', which feels to me like it should only apply to
> > pattern synonyms. But according to 
> > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/167#issuecomment-425736470
> > it sounds like that ship may have sailed already if we want to be
> > consistent (which we should!).
> 
> We can maybe fix it consistently, and phase out “pattern” (make it an
> alias for whatever we choose) … but do we have an obviously appropriate
> name?
> 
> Cheers,
> Joachim
> 
> -- 
> Joachim Breitner
>   mail at joachim-breitner.de
>   http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
> Email had 1 attachment:
> + signature.asc
>   1k (application/pgp-signature)