I suggest changing the User's Guide extensions documentation to consistently use the LANGUAGE pragma form to specify extensions and code examples, rather than a combination of LANGUAGE pragmas and -XExtension flags. I find the combination of the two confusing. Also, the reader copying code examples which require a specific LANGUAGE to compile will be assisted by including the LANGUAGE pragma in the code examples. For example, in section 7.3, I would change: -------------------------------------------- 7.3. Syntactic extensions 7.3.1. Unicode syntax The language extension -XUnicodeSyntax enables Unicode characters to be used to stand for certain ASCII character sequences. -------------------------------------------- To: -------------------------------------------- 7.3. Syntactic extensions 7.3.1. Unicode syntax The language extension {-# LANGUAGE UnicodeSyntax #-} enables Unicode characters to be used to stand for certain ASCII character sequences. -------------------------------------------- Similarly, I would include the required LANGUAGE pragma(s) in _all_ code examples. For example, in section 7.3.7, I would change: -------------------------------------------- type Typ data TypView = Unit | Arrow Typ Typ view :: Typ -> TypView -- additional operations for constructing Typ's ... -------------------------------------------- To: -------------------------------------------- {-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns #-} type Typ data TypView = Unit | Arrow Typ Typ view :: Typ -> TypView -- additional operations for constructing Typ's ... -------------------------------------------- I realize that LANGUAGE pragmas must be in file headers. While it is possible that users may be confused if they try to put pragmas in the body of a source file, I believe this will be outweighed by the benefit of making the examples clearer about the extensions necessary to use them. If this change is accepted, I volunteer to make the necessary documentation patches to implement it. Howard B. Golden Northridge, CA USA