Okay, let me summarize the voiced opinions: We have agreement on the change to multiplicities. On the infix type operator we are a bit stuck: * Richard, Eric and I are in favor of fixing the bug. * Adam and Arnaud are in favor of staying stable, living with the exception * Simon was on the fix side but switched to undecided, waiting for more opinions * Moritz preferred staying stable, but deferred to Simon before his switch Overall slightly more votes for the change but subjectively hold less strongly than the opinions against it. Since I am unclear on how to proceed I’d love to hear more opinions (especially of committee members who haven’t voiced theirs about this proposal). I am generally not a fan of enshrining historic coincidence in the language when the cost of fixing it is bareable. On the other hand this is such a minor detail that I don’t think it will matter much in either direction. If we cannot come to a consensus soon I will put it a to a vote. We shouldn’t spend too much time on this. Best Malte On 2024-03-19 15:12, Arnaud Spiwack wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 10:26, Simon Peyton Jones < simon.peytonjones@gmail.com> wrote:
But I think you are now saying that *even if a left-to-right order was "best", *there is a long-standing bug in GHC that puts `b` first in (a `b` c`), and it's not worth the risk of change. So instead we should institutionalise the bug into the spec.
This is, at least, my position. This is a bug fix, but the bug is so tiny, that even if the breakage is rare, it's not necessarily worth it, and it may be better to bake the exception into the spec. I'm weakly on the side that baking the exception is better.
_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee