base package -- goals

Ian Lynagh ian at
Wed Feb 27 18:22:37 CET 2013

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:54:35PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 25/02/13 18:05, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >
> >Personally, I don't think the language report should be specifying the
> >content of libraries at all,
> It's not that straightforward, because the language report refers to
> various library functions, types and classes.  For example, integer
> literals give rise to a constraint on Num, so we have to say what
> Num is.  Guards depend on Bool, the translation of list
> comprehensions refers to "map", and so on.
> It could be whittled down certainly (we actually removed a few
> libraries in Haskell 2010), but there's still a core that is tied to
> the language definition.

Yes, OK, my language was a bit strong: s/at all/any more than necessary/


More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list