HP Package Requirements
jason.dusek at gmail.com
Mon Jan 14 15:45:46 CET 2013
2013/1/13 wren ng thornton <wren at freegeek.org>:
> On 1/13/13 8:55 AM, Gregory Collins wrote:
>> A especially strong -1 from me to any effort to enforce Haskell 98
>> compatibility for Haskell Platform packages: that standard is 15 years old
>> now, and has been superseded by Haskell 2010.
> I think it would be unjust to require H2010 compliance,
> however I do think it would be good to strongly suggest that
> people hew closer to the standard than they would in
> non-platform code.
This is reasonable on its face; but the motivation of supporting
research implementations is perhaps less than practical. Is the
platform, as a "batteries included" environment, really intended
to support compiler writers and researchers?
In practice, production code is written for GHC and likely even
relies on it for performance, syntax features and type system
Many production languages are in practice defined by a leading
implementation, the one used in production, even if they have
a few research implementations. (The varied JVMs, Rubies and
Pythons of the world come to mind.)
Perhaps "production Haskell" has to be understood as a
distinctive line of development of the language, marked out and
maintained in a way compatible with its needs.
pgp // solidsnack // C1EBC57DC55144F35460C8DF1FD4C6C1FED18A2B
More information about the Libraries