Re: The future of the Haskell98 and Haskell2010 packages

I think you're right, and that's a strong reason to come up with an update to the Haskell Report. Include in it, at least: -- Big-ticket items 0. Monoid 1. Foldable, Traversable 2. Applicative 3. Applicative => Monad -- side notes 4. inits = map reverse . scanl (flip (:)) [] -- efficiency—not optimal but not hilariously bad 5. unwords = intercalate " " -- increased, more intuitive laziness On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Richard Eisenberg wrote:

I support this direction. But I disagree with one statement you've made:

On Nov 18, 2014, at 11:07 AM, Austin Seipp wrote:

...

To be clear: GHC can still typecheck, compile, and efficiently execute Haskell 2010 code. It is merely the distribution of compatible packages that has put us in something of a bind.

GHC 7.10 will not be able to compile a Haskell2010-compliant Monad instance. In fact, as far as I can see, there is no way to write a Monad instance that is both portable to other Haskell compilers and acceptable to GHC 7.10. I think this point should be included in the manual (if I'm right).

This makes me a little sad, but I don't disagree with any of the decisions we've made along the way.

Richard _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users