GHC 7.8 release?

[Joachim Breitner-2]

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#HandlingPrelude

I 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

[Johan Tibell-2]

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

Most people won't care and will continue to depend on enough to get Prelude.

Let me just put this out here so keep it in the back of our heads: most people don't care about this whole thing (splitting base) so lets make sure there's still a base package to import that gives people what they have before. :) Other than that I'm quite excited about the prospects of splitting up base a bit. 

-- Johan

_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users