Proposal: Slim base-5 API package

[Henning Thielemann]

On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Joachim Breitner wrote:

> I don’t think the plan is to have different implementations of stuff in
> base at the same time. If different compilers (fay) replace the
> base-implementing packages, then there is another implementation, but
> that would never interfere with a definition on GHC. Or what scenario do
> you have in mind?

I think his wish was to ensure that e.g. 'map' has the same type in GHC, 
fay, JHC and others, although it might be implemented differently (with 
foldr/build, or stream-fusion, or whatever).