ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.8.2
gale at sefer.org
Sat Dec 15 22:14:32 EST 2007
Sorry, my asterisks were not at all meant to be a flame.
Please accept my sincere apologies if it appeared that way.
>> It is *not* "trivial to wrap the function in question", and
>> it is not "more correct".
Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
> Why is it *not* trivial to wrap the function? Regardless of
> whether you like the resulting solution, it is undeniably trivial
> to change the name of a function, create a new function with
> the (original) name, and have that new function...
> implement different behavior...
That may be trivial when writing a new program, but it may also
be difficult or even impossible when the code is already in use
and shared among many other existing programs.
o The current (until recently) method has been in place for a
long time, and works fine.
o It follows a widely-used convention, though arguably a
somewhat messy one.
o It provides a prominent behavior, so changing it suddenly
is very painful.
o It is dubious whether the change, as implemented, achieves
its intended purpose at all, namely better Windows integration.
o Even if you believe that it does, the small amount of value
it provides is not worth the cost.
I support providing a default value for the home directory
when the user does not specify one. It would be nice if
this could be done in a more Windowsy way.
Since another of my points is that we are focusing
too much on this issue, I will say no more and gracefully
accept whatever the community decides at this point.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users