[ghc-steering-committee] Please review "Visible 'forall' in types of terms" #281

[Alejandro Serrano Mena]

Hi all,
For me, there are two main concerns here:

   1. This could be split on different proposals: (1) using the “forall a
   ->” syntax, (2) conflating the type and term syntax and namespaces, (3)
   introducing checking and inference for it;
   2. I find the claim that you can just take the Quick Look
   Impredicativity paper, make a couple of adjustments, and get correct
   checking and inference. This kind of big change is the one for which I
   would actually expect a peer-reviewed paper.


Regards,
Alejandro

El El sáb, 21 nov 2020 a las 10:10, Joachim Breitner <
mail at joachim-breitner.de> escribió:

> Dear Committee,
>
> Iavor suggested to reject this proposal, but we have not heard a lot
> here yet. Especially before rejecting proposals, we probably owe a
> careful analysis, possibly with suggestions of ways forward (splitting
> the proposal into smaller pieces maybe? Iavor says there are many
> changes there).
>
> If we have continued silence, we’d reject.
>
> Cheers,
> Joachim
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 11.11.2020, 13:41 -0800 schrieb Iavor Diatchki:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Proposal #281 has been submitted for review by the committee again,
> please read through it and let's have a discussion.   Here are links to the
> proposal's discussion section, and the proposal text:
> >
> > https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/281
> >
> https://github.com/int-index/ghc-proposals/blob/visible-forall/proposals/0000-visible-forall.rst
> >
> > While I suggested acceptance on the previous version, I am leaning
> towards rejecting the proposal  now.  My reasoning is that I hadn't fully
> understood all the aspects of the original proposal, and the new proposal
> seems to lack a simple modular specification.  There are *many* changes
> described in the document,  but I found it hard to understand what is the
> current design, from the point of view of a user of the feature, as opposed
> to someone trying to implement it.
> >
> > I'd be curious about what others think.
> >
> > -Iavor
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201122/e0641d7d/attachment.html>