[ghc-steering-committee] Bang patterns: 343

[Spiwack, Arnaud]

Dear all,

I agree that this proposal doesn't make that much sense on its own. But it
does raise a good point. Maybe it's a sign that it's time to have a
conversation about defaults. I don't know where and how this conversation
ought to take place. But maybe GHC's default need not be those of Haskell
2010.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:20 AM Tom Harding <tomjharding at live.co.uk> wrote:

> Seconded, and very keen on the idea of collective synonyms as a more
> lightweight alternative to regularly-updated language specifications.
>
> Cheers,
> Tom
>
> On 28 Jul 2020, at 09:13, Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I agree with the rejection. My main concern, as shared by others in the
> thread, is why this specific extension and not others.
>
> I am really looking forward to the addition of synonyms for a bunch of
> extensions. Personally, I would love to see a way to enable every
> "additive" extension (I am thinking of MultiParamTypeClasses +
> FlexibleThings + ViewAndBangPatterns + ...). I would be happy to help with
> setting up the process.
>
> Regards,
> Alejandro
>
> El mar., 28 jul. 2020 a las 10:03, Simon Peyton Jones via
> ghc-steering-committee (<ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>) escribió:
>
>> Friends
>>
>> Despite asking, I’m not seeing any support for proposal 343 “Enable bang
>> patterns by default
>> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/343>”, except from
>> the author. He makes a good case, but I think it’s a case that you could
>> make for quite a few extensions.
>>
>> I propose that we reject the proposal as written.  Any objections?
>>
>> That leaves the wider question, best summarised by Joachim’s post
>> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/343#issuecomment-664631343>:
>> we could occasionally add a new synonym for a bunch of extensions.   I
>> suppose we’d have to (a) debate and decide that process and (b) execute on
>> the process.   Perhaps that’d be useful but it’s all work.  Let’s first see
>> if there is real support for doing it.   If so, probably the best thing
>> would be for someone who wants it to happen to write a proposal (as Joachim
>> has started) describing the process.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20200728/bccf2981/attachment-0001.html>