Proposal: Remove Control.Concurrent{QSem, QSemN, , SampleVar, mergeIO, nmergeIO} from base
Bryan O'Sullivan
bos at serpentine.com
Thu Jun 7 19:21:31 CEST 2012
- Previous message: Proposal: Remove Control.Concurrent{QSem, QSemN, , SampleVar, mergeIO, nmergeIO} from base
- Next message: Proposal: Remove Control.Concurrent{QSem, QSemN, , SampleVar, mergeIO, nmergeIO} from base
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Bas van Dijk <v.dijk.bas at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 June 2012 14:46, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> > I propose that we remove ... from base.
>
> Shouldn't they first get through a deprecation cycle?
>
I don't see any value to that; it just adds a year of latency.
We have plenty of evidence that "this will break in the next release"
warnings are ignored until after that next release, when people who update
are finally forced to confront stuff being broken.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20120607/857794f9/attachment.htm>
- Previous message: Proposal: Remove Control.Concurrent{QSem, QSemN, , SampleVar, mergeIO, nmergeIO} from base
- Next message: Proposal: Remove Control.Concurrent{QSem, QSemN, , SampleVar, mergeIO, nmergeIO} from base
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the Libraries
mailing list