[ghc-steering-committee] Modifiers and #512: NoFieldSelectors

[Vladislav Zavialov]

Dear Committee Members,

Our previous discussion regarding #512 was inconclusive.

Thread 1:
https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/2022-November/002991.html
Thread 2:
https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/2022-December/003015.html

#512 is the proposal that introduces per-declaration, per-constructor, and
per-field NoFieldSelectors annotations.

I'm not quite sure how to summarize the discussion because everyone seems
to have a unique view. But it all revolves around a syntactic issue: should
the proposal use pragma-based syntax or modifiers-based syntax?

Here are two facts to inform your opinion:

1. The Modifiers proposal is accepted, and it makes sense to use it for the
proposed feature
2. The Modifiers proposal is, however, unimplemented

So at the moment #512 says that we'd first introduce the pragma-based
syntax, and when Modifiers are implemented we could deprecate the
pragma-based syntax in favor of Modifiers.

I am *strongly* opposed to introducing a feature that we know is destined
for deprecation. But not everyone shares this attitude, apparently, so
let's vote.

Here are the options. Select all that you find acceptable (multiple-choice):
* [ ] Accept the proposal with pragma-based syntax, then deprecate it and
switch to modifiers-based syntax
* [ ] Accept the proposal with pragma-based syntax, do not switch to
modifiers-based syntax
* [ ] Revise the proposal to use modifiers-based syntax and then accept
* [ ] Reject the proposal regardless of syntax

Before you vote, let me try to sway you towards the "revise" option. If we
choose to revise, I volunteer to implement Modifiers in time for GHC 9.12.
I believe Modifiers are a splendid idea and I envision many good uses for
them.

Vlad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20231211/9d64ba7a/attachment.html>