Hi, (listening to the sound of silence for a while) accepted! Joachim Am Montag, den 10.09.2018, 09:45 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
SGTM
(sounds good to me)
I like the easy ones :-)
Am Montag, den 10.09.2018, 08:13 +0100 schrieb Simon Marlow:
The proposer wants to change the implementation of StableNames, and noticed that the existing implementation has the property that, for two StableNames s1 and s2 that are currently live,
hashStableName s1 == hashStableName s2 ==> s1 == s2
this property is not documented. As far as we know, there isn't any code in the wild that relies on it. In fact, relying on it would be tricky due to the requirement that s1 and s2 have to be live - as soon as a StableName becomes unreachable from the GC's point of view, the index into the table that is used to provide the result of hashStableName is reused.
The proposal is to remove this property. Well, a future refactoring of the StableName implemnetation would actually remove the property, the proposer wants the committee to consider whether the property in question is worth keeping (and therefore documenting).
I think it's pretty clear that we don't want to document this property, because in order to do so we would have to give a precise definition of what "live" means, which is not possible. Furthermore, we don't know of any use cases in the wild. So, let's accept the proposal.
Cheers Simon _______________________________________________ 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 -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/