[ghc-steering-committee] #380 GHC2021: How to proceed?

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

> Then we should allow a fortnight, say to 18 Jan (my birthday).

if Simon says that his birthday wish from us is a well-thought through,
conclusively discussed, shiny and nice GHC2021, then of course we will
make it so :-)

Am Montag, den 21.12.2020, 19:50 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones via
ghc-steering-committee:
> As you know, I have found it extremely difficult to make sense of a table with more than 100 rows.  I think we need a global summary and I have prepared one here:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BMJtUQGk1HKOFgLnczybAwd1HgqbNpZA7elM4VnANa8/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> Is it accurate?  I have not cross-checked against the vote table in the last week or two. You all have edit permission for this document.

It’s accurate, but checking was was quite tedious, hard to automate,
and hence. I guess I can keep it up to date as new votes come in, so
that might be fine.

Or I scrape the categorization of extensions from the docs (
https://ghc.gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/doc/users_guide/exts.html nicely
groups them by topic), and generate this view automatically from the
data, as part of
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/blob/ghc2021/proposals/0000-ghc2021.rst#data

Would that help?

> * Everyone: check that the union of "in" and "barely in" makes sense as a
>   coherent language design
> * Everyone: make the case for any changes. But only for borderline cases. No
>   point in arguing for something that is nowhere near the borderline, unless
>   you really think everyone has misunderstood
>
> I think the period from now to 4 Jan doesn't count. Then we should allow a 
> fortnight, say to 18 Jan (my birthday).
> 
> Is that acceptable?

Very much so, I think, thanks.

Also remember to go through your maybes. (If both SPJ and Arnaud turn
their “maybe” about UnicodeSyntax to yes it makes it in ;-))


Cheers,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/