Chris, Cale, Simon

I wonder if you might have a moment to respond to this email?

Thanks

Simon

From: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj@microsoft.com>
Sent: 09 March 2020 09:56
To: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org>
Cc: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj@microsoft.com>
Subject: RE: RecordDotSyntax proposal: next steps

Colleagues

Thanks for your various replies. I have

Added a couple more examples (please check)
Split (C2a) and (C2b) – thank you Joachim for filling out the list.
Add a Notes section that identifies some consequences, hopefully objectively.
Added a list at the end where you can add your AYE when happy.

Can you review, and Christopher, Richard, Cale, Simon, Eric, Alejandro, Arnaud: please add AYE or suggest further changes.

This is painstaking but I think it is clarifying. I have found writing out the examples is quite helpful. Feel free to suggest more if you think there are some cases that are unclear.

Thanks

Simon

From: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj@microsoft.com>
Sent: 06 March 2020 17:59
To: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org>
Cc: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj@microsoft.com>
Subject: RecordDotSyntax proposal: next steps

Colleagues

I’m sorry to have been dragging my feet on the records proposal. First there was half term holiday, and then the ICFP deadline, so I’ve been out of action for several weeks.

It’s pretty clear that we are not going to achieve 100% consensus, so the right thing to do is to vote, using the single-transferrable-vote scheme that Joachim runs. It’s worth striving for consensus, because the debate can be clarifying (and has been!). But I don’t regard non-consensus as a failure. These things are all judgement calls, and people’s judgement can legitimately differ. Voting lets us nevertheless reach a conclusion.

So here’s what I propose

I’ve put up a list of choices for us to vote on here, informed by our most recent email exchanges. The first thing is to ensure that this list is

Complete: no choices that people really want are omitted.
Clear and unambiguous. When we vote we must know exactly what we are voting for!

Can you all respond about that, including “Aye” if you think it is both complete and clear.

Once we are all satisfied, I’ll invite you to vote. The easiest way to do so might be to edit the Google doc directly, so there’s a single point of reference.

Please also let me know if you think we should be doing anything else.

Thanks!

Simon