I think that my discussion with Richard has come to a conclusion (it should incur a small modification to the proposal).It is a very small (amendment to a) proposal, let's find a consensus on this one quickly.On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:26 AM Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack@tweag.io> wrote:I've commented on the PR [ https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/392#pullrequestreview-657652189 ] the changes on the syntax of lambda expressions are not motivated at all, I think at the very least there should be a discussion in the Alternatives section.But mostly, I'm worried about the implications/interactions that these changes have with linear types.(I'll be off for the rest of the week starting tonight, so I'll be back on this conversation on Monday, most likely)On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:10 AM Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill@gmail.com> wrote:_______________________________________________Dear Committee,This proposal seems a natural extension of #370, covering some additional cases (modifiers to classes and other declarations) that we’ve found along the way. My recommendation is acceptance.Regards,Alejandro
On 4 May 2021 at 09:41:56, Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de> wrote:Dear Committe,
Clarify modifiers design principle
has been proposed by Richard
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/392
This is an amendmend to #370, see the PR description for links to diffs
etc.
I propose Alejandro as the shepherd, as he shepherded #370 before.
Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process
Thanks,
Joachim
--
--
Joachim Breitner
mail@joachim-breitner.de
http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee