[ghc-steering-committee] Please review #254: Scale back "Function Result Type Signatures" Shepherd: SPJ

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

I sense consensus, will mark as accepted.

Cheers,
Joachim

Am Freitag, den 18.10.2019, 11:17 -0700 schrieb Iavor Diatchki:
> The scaling back seems reasonable to me.
> 
> Similar to Simon's comment
> (https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/254#issuecomment-542644791)
> I am also quite unclear of what a return type annotations like `Num a
> => a -> a` is supposed to mean.  After all, `a` is not universally
> quantified here, it is just a name for a type that occurs in the
> result, so the definition of the function could already impose
> whatever constraints it wants on it...
> 
> -Iavor
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:11 AM Spiwack, Arnaud
> <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io> wrote:
> > I'm convinced.
> > 
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:51 PM Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org> wrote:
> > > Colleagues
> > > 
> > > I recommend acceptance.  I have given my reasoning here:
> > > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/254#issuecomment-542643788
> > > 
> > > Simon
> > > 
> > > >  -----Original Message-----
> > > >  From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org>
> > > >  On Behalf Of Joachim Breitner
> > > >  Sent: 14 October 2019 08:35
> > > >  To: ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> > > >  Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #254: Scale back "Function
> > > >  Result Type Signatures" Shepherd: SPJ
> > > > 
> > > >  Dear Committee,
> > > > 
> > > >  this is your secretary speaking:
> > > > 
> > > >  Scale back "Function Result Type Signatures" to keep pattern sigs as-is
> > > >  has been proposed by John Ericson
> > > >  https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/254
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  This proposal amends #228, so I propose Simon PJ as the shepherd,
> > > >  because he also shepherded #228.
> > > > 
> > > >  Please reach consensus as described in
> > > >  https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process
> > > >  In particular, talk to the authors before, if you think this should be
> > > >  rejected, and kick off the discussion on Github, following the steps
> > > >  described under “Now the shepherd proposes to accept or reject the
> > > >  proposal” in the above link.
> > > > 
> > > >  Thanks,
> > > >  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
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
-- 
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/