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

[Simon Peyton Jones]

Currently Haskell98 and Haskell2010 are a special kind of LANGUAGE option that can't be reversed, and later ones override earlier ones. I think we should treat GHC2021 in the same way.
Fine with me. I'd just like to see it specified in the proposal.

Simon

From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org> On Behalf Of Simon Marlow
Sent: 18 January 2021 15:01
To: Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
Cc: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>
Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] #380 GHC2021: How to proceed?

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 11:08, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de<mailto:mail at joachim-breitner.de>> wrote:


> Is there `-XNoGHC2021`, and if so what does it do?  Proposal should say.

The meta-proposal says

   This language version can be used as a language extension (with the
   sole effect of implying other language extensions), but also as a
   language versions in places where Haskell98 or Haskell2010 is valid
   (e.g. via Cabal's default-language field).

   When ghc is used without an explicit language choice, the latest
   GHC20xx known to GHC is used. This applies in particular to uses of
   ghci.

and I'd hope that this answers such technical details (and that the GHC
devs will resolve obscure corner cases sensibly)?

It seems that ghc-8.8 does not know -XNoHaskell2010, so I would assume
that there is no -XNoHaskell2010 either. If there is a nice use case
for that, I think adding this a feature doesn't need committee
involvement, and can be done by GHC contributers.

Currently Haskell98 and Haskell2010 are a special kind of LANGUAGE option that can't be reversed, and later ones override earlier ones. I think we should treat GHC2021 in the same way.

Relatedly, at least one community member asked for a way to opt-into
the current "default" mode of GHC (which is neither Haskell98 nor
Haskell2010, e.g. it has NondecreasingIndentation).
He suggested simply calling that GHC2020. Whether that happens, and if
it's called GHC2020 or OldDefault or something else, I'd also trust the
GHC devs.

GHC2020 seems reasonable to me.

Cheers
Simon



Cheers,
Joachim


--
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de<mailto:mail at joachim-breitner.de>
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joachim-breitner.de%2F&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf30806e7570b4ca94cb408d8bbc1f425%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637465789560190043%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=nbmafO%2BrNiq6NfdEF42Sxn%2FzEVbSC753Lg%2FSYJu%2B0T4%3D&reserved=0>


_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org<mailto:ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf30806e7570b4ca94cb408d8bbc1f425%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637465789560200041%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=39P%2FPjuR2DDFWLZAZo8RsIEB1nH6rJdYRcmQUDF%2Bxfw%3D&reserved=0>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20210118/8e394a09/attachment-0001.html>