Type design question

[Malcolm Wallace]

Konrad Hinsen <hinsen@cnrs-orleans.fr> writes:

> More fundamentally, I consider the module system in its present form a major
> weak point of Haskell. There is only one global module namespace, which 
> therefore is a scarce resource. If, as I have seen proposed in some book, I 
> use up a global module name for each abstract data type, then I can almost 
> expect to get name clashes as soon as I try to use my code together with 
> someone else's (who thought that "vector" would be a great name for
> something slightly different). I have seen the proposal for hierarchical
> libraries, but that seems to be no more than a proposal at the moment.

The proposal for a hierarchical module *namespace* is much more than
a proposal now.  It is actively supported by all the current Haskell
systems, and there is a large and growing collection of libraries
that use it, many of them distributed with the compilers.

Regards,
    Malcolm