Yes on qualified strings from me as well.
I vote yes for qualified strings (apologies, I thought I already had).
Apologies that I've been struggling to find time to page all this in. I
think:
* QualifiedStrings is an unqualified (ha ha) "yes" and we should accept
that part as-is.
* QualifiedNumerics seems almost to have converged on a consensus
design, with the sole remaining question being whether the desugaring
uses `negate` even when NegativeLiterals is disabled. So I think we
could probably accept conditionally on that change?
* QualifiedLists does seem to need a little more thought.
I like the general rule Sebastian proposes
(https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724#issuecomment-3359455039):
> If M.<stx> is syntax enabled by a -XQualified<ext> extension, then any
> overloaded function f in the expansion of <stx> (under
> XOverloaded<ext>, if that exists) will be rebound to M.f instead.
Ideally we'd extend this rule to RebindableSyntax as well, something like:
> When RebindableSyntax is in effect, then any overloaded function f in
the expansion of <stx> will be rebound to whatever f is in scope.
This means everything behaves simply and predictably. The downside is
that we are constrained by the existing design (of overloaded
numerics/lists in particular), so we may not want to enforce this as a
hard rule immediately, but I think we can treat it as a goal to aim for,
and think about suitable migration strategies for getting to that point
without an unreasonable level of breakage.
Cheers,
Adam
On 03/10/2025 07:23, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Trying to drive this forward.
>>
>> The general consensus seems to be to accept QualifiedStrings. I would
>> suggest that we accept this on October 7th unless someone yells before
>> then.
>>
>> There seems to be quite a few of reservations on QualifiedNumerics,
>> with the main sticking point being the treatment of negative literals
>> and natural numbers. I will consult with the proposer on this.
>>
>> For QualifiedLists it seems we are even further from consensus. Again,
>> I will consult with the proposer on this.
>
> Hi,
>
> For the QualifiedStrings proposal I have "accept" votes from Simon Peyton
> Jones, Malte Ott, Matthías Páll Gissurarson, Sebastian Graf, Erik de Castro
> Lopo and Moritz Angermann.
>
> I have not seen a response from Simon Marlow, Eric Seidel, Arnaud Spiwack,
> Arnaud Spiwack or Jakob Brünker. I have CCed the ones I do have email
> addresses for, but have no address for Eric Seidel or Jakob Brünker.
>
> I am hoping to get the voting for QualifiedStrings done by October 7th.
>
> The other two related proposals well be sent back to the proposer for
> review.
>
> Thanks,
> Erik
--
Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant
Well-Typed LLP, https://www.well-typed.com/
Registered in England & Wales, OC335890
27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX, England
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org
--
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org