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?
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
(Just stating that for completeness, my preference is still option
(P4)+(I1), i.e. multiple partial Prelude modules which all automatically
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.