Dear Committee
For this proposal:
Overloaded Quotations
has been proposed by Matthew Pickering
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/246
https://github.com/mpickering/ghc-proposals/blob/overloaded-proposal/proposa...
I propose that we accept. As you'll see in the discussion thread I have asked Matthew to clarify some issues, but I'd like to get a sense of the committee because I don't want him to invest a lot of effort if it'll be wasted.
But I think it all seems like a useful generalisation. It accommodates what we do, and allows us to do more. This will make a modest difference for some, but a very big difference for a few. As far as I can tell, it will -- at worst -- require a bit of API generalisation for some users, but perhaps not many, so it scores well on the back-compat front.
Opinions please. I rather dislike "silence as assent" because it allow us to dodge our responsibility to read proposals and form an opinion. So please express an opinion, even if you want to qualify it by saying you are no expert. Please try to do this within a week, and definitely no more than two.
It's also fine to point to bits of the proposal that you did not understand or found hard going. The proposal will only become stronger if it is better presented.
Add technical questions on the Github thread, and evaluative judgements here on the mailing list.
Thanks
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-steering-committee