Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 13.03.2013, 14:04 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
> Your follow-on remarks (appended below) about which implicit Prelude
> you get if you (say) import only `base-pure` are well-taken, but they
> apply equally to (B). Worth adding a section to the Wiki page to
> discuss this?
Sure, done, including stated opinions so far:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/SplitBase#HandlingPreludeI also noticed an advantage of (P2) (No Prelude in any of the shim
packages, but in a separate base-prelude package): It allows programmers
to mix conveniently the shim packages with packages that provide a
non-standard prelude (classy-prelude comes to my mind) without any use
of NoImplicitPrelude.
(Just stating that for completeness, my preference is still option
(P4)+(I1), i.e. multiple partial Prelude modules which all automatically
imported.)
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
[hidden email] | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
JID:
[hidden email] |
http://people.debian.org/~nomeata_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users