Are there GHC extensions we'd like to incorporate wholesale?

[Dominique Devriese]

As an outsider, I would like to suggest thinking about MonoLocalBinds.  GHC
has a rather convincing story (at least to me) that "(local) let should not
be generalised" (since it becomes problematic in combination with several
other language extensions) and the journal version of the OutsideIn(X)
paper has empirical data that indicates it is not a big problem to remove.
If there is a concern about backwards compatibility, perhaps the committee
could deprecate local let generalisation in Haskell2020 and remove it in a
subsequent iteration of the report?

Regards,
Dominique

Op wo 4 mei 2016 om 07:00 schreef M Farkas-Dyck <m.farkasdyck at gmail.com>:

> On 02/05/2016, Cale Gibbard <cgibbard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This question implicitly has two parts:
> >
> > 1) Are there GHC extensions which the Report ought to describe in their
> > entirety? ...
> >
> > 2) Are there extensions which ought to stop being extensions? ...
>
> I agree here, except as noted in my earlier mail in this thread.
>
> An extension i might like to no longer be an extension is
> NoMonomorphismRestriction, which i haven't yet seen brought up in this
> thread. I recognize it has some rationale for it, but i surely want
> this committee to at least re-evaluate its merits.
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/attachments/20160504/9c59beae/attachment-0001.html>