as long as we clearly communicate that there may be refinements / breaking changes subsequently, i'm all for it, unless merging it in slows down 7.8 hitting RC .  (its taken long enough for RC to happen... don't want to drag it out further)


On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Richard Eisenberg <eir@cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
+1 for inclusion. This is a nicely opt-in feature, and so (barring any regressions) only those intrepid people who want it will be affected.

Richard

On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:17 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Am Montag, den 06.01.2014, 12:42 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
>> We could put it in the release with warnings saying "the exact
>> details, esp of syntax, might change, but do try it".  I'd be ok with
>> that, and we've done it before.
>>
>> What do other people think?
>
> This feature may be so good that people will use it in, say, released
> libraries, disregarding the warning.
>
> But it seems that any possible syntax change will only affect those who
> define pattern synonyms, and not those who use them, and hence only
> cause work for those disregarding the warning, I’m in favor of
> inclusion.
>
> Greetings,
> Joachim
>
>
> --
> Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
>  mail@joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
>  Jabber: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de  • GPG-Key: 0x4743206C
>  Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs