Donald Bruce Stewart
dons at cse.unsw.edu.au
Thu Nov 23 21:15:04 EST 2006
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 01:17:19AM +0000, Neil Mitchell wrote:
> > I know Bulat is investigating this, are the GHC team/Igloo aiming to
> > split up base with any particular target timeframe?
> It would be possible to split off bytestring, containers, prettyprinting
> and printf now (though some of them would still be in GHC's core, as
> they're used by Cabal). Splitting the rest is more complicated than
> picking GHC.*, as there are many interdependencies. But we could do
> the easy part now.
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 03:35:49AM +0300, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> > in particular, my hottest hope is that ghc 6.6.1 will be shipped with
> > fps 0.8 as separate library that will provide both backward
> > compatibility with 6.6 and will allow to upgrade fps without recompiling
> > ghc itself :D
> This would be a violation of the "no interface changes in minor releases"
> rule (though at the package level rather than the module level, assuming
> the split fps was core), but I think there's a strong argument for it,
> since development of this package is continuing outside base.
I'd be ok with this.
I'm interested in SimonM's opinion, as he was interested in adding it to
base originally (to replace PackedString, and to have things in base use
More information about the Libraries