Syntax extensions (was: RE: The Future of Haskell discussion at the Haskell Workshop)

[Graham Klyne]

At 13:13 10/09/03 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
>Of course, if we change the language that is implied by -fglasgow-exts 
>now, we risk breaking old code :-)  Would folk prefer existing syntax 
>extensions be moved into their own flags, or left in -fglasgow-exts for 
>now?  I'm thinking of:
>
>   - implicit parameters
>   - template haskell
>   - FFI
>   - rank-N polymorphism (forall keyword)
>   - recursive 'do' (mdo keyword)

My 2p is that extensions that might be regarded as "mainstream" would 
usefully be included in a single easy-to-use switch like -fglasgow-exts.  I 
think the only part I use from the above list is rank-N polymorphism, and 
that is imported from useful libraries.

Where do multi-parameter classes fit in?

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org