If you see my comment https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/65#issuecomment-32530108... you'll see that I finally realised that GHC (and indeed H98) /already/ allows different fixities for term and type level. So now I'm more supportive: it's become /solely/ a question of whether we supply concrete syntax to allow us to do something on one module that we can /already/ do (perhaps inconveniently) with two. So I'm now mildly in favour. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-steering-committee [mailto:ghc-steering-committee- | bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Joachim Breitner | Sent: 20 September 2017 17:24 | To: ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org | Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Proposal: Type Fixity (#65), | Recommendation: Reject | | Hi, | | the type fixity proposal | (https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com | %2Fghc-proposals%2Fghc- | proposals%2Fpull%2F65&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cc0583aed4fbd4 | f37a40a08d500441d81%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63641521490 | 8671210&sdata=%2F9oJkejSngjz%2FGy12Q%2FJlPOzzFdT%2FHD9SslPffMcA60%3D&reserve | d=0) | was met with mixed reactions. | | * I recommended rejection and Manuel strongly agrees with me. | * SPJ does not have strong opinions either way. | * Richard is in favor, and Iavor agrees. | | | Our process says “If consensus is elusive, then we vote, with the Simons | retaining veto power.” It looks like this might be such a case. | Should we go ahead and vote, or is more discussion likely to sway some of | us? | | (I guess I can be swayed towards acceptance, especially if this proposal re- | uses existing syntactic idioms from export lists with ExplicitNamespaces | on.) | | Greetings, | Joachim | | | | Am Sonntag, den 27.08.2017, 20:16 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner: | > Dear Committee, | > | > Ryan Scott’s proposal to allow fixity declaration to explicitly target | > values or types has been brought before us: | > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu | > b.com%2FRyanGlScott%2Fghc-proposals%2Fblob%2Ftype-infix%2F0000-type-in | > fix.rst&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cc0583aed4fbd4f37a40a0 | > 8d500441d81%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6364152149086 | > 71210&sdata=1qRrPKmHWYpB9XRFOHwiJT2Kwc%2B%2BOtf0vm0ibOWuTQI%3D&reserve | > d=0 | > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu | > b.com%2Fghc-proposals%2Fghc-proposals%2Fpull%2F65&data=02%7C01%7Csimon | > pj%40microsoft.com%7Cc0583aed4fbd4f37a40a08d500441d81%7C72f988bf86f141 | > af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636415214908671210&sdata=%2F9oJkejSngjz%2 | > FGy12Q%2FJlPOzzFdT%2FHD9SslPffMcA60%3D&reserved=0 | > | > I (the secretary) nominates myself as the shepherd, so I can right | > away continue giving a recommendation. | > | > I propose to reject this proposal. The main reasons are: | > * it is not clear if there is a real use case for this. Has anyone | > ever complained about the status quo? | > The proposal does not motivate the need for a change well enough. | > (There is a related bug in TH, but that bug can probably simply be | > fixed.) | > * The status quo can be sold as a feature, rather than a short-coming. | > Namely that an operator has a fixed fixity, no matter what namespace | > it lives in. | > This matches morally what other languages do: In Gallina, fixity | > is assigned to names independent of their definition, AFAIK. | > * There is a non-trivial implementation and education overhead, a | > weight that is not pulled by the gains. | > | > If we’d design Haskell from scratch, my verdict might possibly be | > different (but maybe we wouldn’t even allow types and values to share | > names then…) | > | > | > Please contradict me or indicate consensus by staying silent. | > | > | > Greetings, | > Joachim | > | > _______________________________________________ | > ghc-steering-committee mailing list | > ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org | > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committ | > ee | -- | Joachim Breitner | mail@joachim-breitner.de | | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joachim- | breitner.de%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cc0583aed4fbd4f37a40a | 08d500441d81%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636415214908671210 | &sdata=73MgFmM8BOaWVRs4%2BMi3iLBpNcDip7g2DLVsEesYbuw%3D&reserved=0 | | -- | Joachim “nomeata” Breitner | mail@joachim-breitner.de | | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joachim | - | breitner.de%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cc0583aed4fbd4f37a40a | 08d500441d81%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636415214908671210 | &sdata=5nSTzp%2FXxt7bGfgRTY0r4qlMn83jTfv1hkTetc34ihg%3D&reserved=0