RE: cvs commit: hugs98 Readme hugs98/docs hugs.1.in hugs98/docs/users_guide hugs_ghc.sgml introduction.sgml running.sgml hugs98/src Makefile.in input.c opts.c opts.h parser.y hugs98/src/unix hugs-package.in test_libraries hugs98/tests ...
ross 2003/09/18 11:02:25 PDT
Modified files: . Readme docs hugs.1.in docs/users_guide hugs_ghc.sgml introduction.sgml running.sgml src Makefile.in input.c opts.c opts.h parser.y src/unix hugs-package.in test_libraries tests testScript Log: Remove the obsolete dlet/with syntax, and the +/-W option.
Should we do this in GHC too? For 6.2 maybe? Cheers, Simon
Simon Marlow wrote:
Remove the obsolete dlet/with syntax, and the +/-W option.
Should we do this in GHC too? For 6.2 maybe?
I think so. 6.2 could be the "Great Cleanup Release", without _casm_/_ccall_, dlet/with, hslibs (well, almost), etc. Cheers, S.
On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 02:02 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
ross 2003/09/18 11:02:25 PDT
Modified files: . Readme docs hugs.1.in docs/users_guide hugs_ghc.sgml introduction.sgml running.sgml src Makefile.in input.c opts.c opts.h parser.y src/unix hugs-package.in test_libraries tests testScript Log: Remove the obsolete dlet/with syntax, and the +/-W option.
Should we do this in GHC too? For 6.2 maybe?
I'd love to see it stay, because it is syntactically oh-so-much-nicer than `let' in practice. However, having lost that battle previously (albeit for the wrong reasons, of course ;-), I can't think of a good reason to keep it. And besides, it bugs Sven, so lets take it out of GHC (for 6.2) as well. --Jeff
participants (3)
-
Jeffrey R Lewis -
Simon Marlow -
Sven Panne