Class System current status
Manuel M T Chakravarty
chak at cse.unsw.edu.au
Sat May 13 12:27:04 EDT 2006
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> > My suggestion is this:
> > * Specify MPTCs in the main language
> > * Specify FDs in an Appendix (with some reasonably conservative
> > interpretation of FDs).
> > * A Haskell' implementation should implement the Appendix, and
> > programmers can write programs against it. But
> > we are advertising specifically that we aren't sure, one way
> > or the other, whether FDs will stay in the language for ever
> Why is an Appendix is better than just a footnote in the Standard that
> says "we aren't sure, one way or the other, whether FDs will stay in the
> language for ever." Why do we need this extra structure?
IMHO the right thing is to decouple finalising an FD/AT appendix from
finalising the main body of Haskell'. This is clearly more easily
realised when the delayed material is out-of-line.
More information about the Haskell-prime