Qualified identifiers opinion

Isaac Dupree isaacdupree at charter.net
Mon Aug 20 07:13:44 EDT 2007

Simon Marlow wrote:
> I believe the solution we adopted for GHC 6.8.1 (and I proposed for 
> Haskell') strikes the right balance.
> M.where is lexed as an identifier.  This doesn't require adding any 
> exceptions or corner cases to either the implementation or the 
> specification of the grammar.  It is much easier to implement than the 
> existing Haskell 98 rule (I deleted 30 lines of code from GHC's lexer to 
> implement it).  It's easy to understand.  It removes an opportunity for 
> obfuscation.  It must be the right thing!

Now I've found the h'-wiki page

I _think_ the change to lexical syntax on that page is the one Simon 
mentions? and is also the same as what I am supporting?

(I am terribly confused about "Foo.f = " though, since I thought I 
_used_ some code that qualified its definitions that way, and thought it 
was odd. Maybe it was just referring to the things it defined by e.g. 
Foo.f (without importing itself), and I was confused, and further 
confused that definitions then COULDN'T be qualified that way? oh dear...)


More information about the Haskell-prime mailing list