22 Jul
2016
22 Jul
'16
5:02 p.m.
+1 from me for keeping the two separate as well. While GHC may be the obviously prevalent Haskell compiler it is a far from the only one, And I’d hate to have to look at a proposal for adding an extension to GHC (which would be riddled with GHC specific implementation specifics) Rather than a clean specification. Maybe I’m naïve but I also see the Haskell committees as doing more than just copy pasting what’s worked. But also evaluate how it can be done Better. I can perfectly well see situations where the implementation in GHC ended up being less useful than It should be just because of Implementation quirks/difficulties in GHC. Cheers, Tamar From: Richard Eisenberg