I'm ok with removal, and there seems to be a consensus. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-steering-committee [mailto:ghc-steering-committee- | bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Manuel M T Chakravarty | Sent: 01 February 2018 00:42 | To: ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org | Subject: [ghc-steering-committee] Proposal #77 "Deprecating STM | invariant mechanism" — suggesting acceptance | | Folks, | | I’d like to reach consensus on Proposal #77 ”Deprecating STM invariant | mechanism”: | | | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu | b.com%2Fbgamari%2Fghc-proposals%2Fblob%2Fdeprecate-stm- | invariants%2Fproposals%2F0000-deprecate-stm- | invariants.rst&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C4e98f234d33d43 | 22f53f08d5690ca443%7Cee3303d7fb734b0c8589bcd847f1c277%7C1%7C0%7C636530 | 425373375028&sdata=fNC1GjVg6tOSuPiw9p0G747PTSJ79E9QX7C6LrG66Qs%3D&rese | rved=0 | | (The discussion thread is at | <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith | ub.com%2Fghc-proposals%2Fghc- | proposals%2Fpull%2F77&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C4e98f23 | 4d33d4322f53f08d5690ca443%7Cee3303d7fb734b0c8589bcd847f1c277%7C1%7C0%7 | C636530425373385036&sdata=C8EnmhpV%2Fzd5pWiWuKpmYULB%2BGXlFTcH4%2BBMgM | VDHDY%3D&reserved=0>.) | | This proposal is about removing a rarely used feature that is arguably | buggy and also imposes significant complexity. I think, removing ideas | that turn out to be not working properly or simply aren’t sufficiently | useful for the complexity they impose is an important part of the | process. The STM invariant mechanism appears to fit that bill. Hence, | I suggest to accept this proposal. | | Please let me know if you disagree; otherwise, I will assume tacit | approval. | | Cheers, | Manuel | | _______________________________________________ | ghc-steering-committee mailing list | ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org | https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering- | committee