I think it's borderline. I think the user-facing behavior could be put together without a proposal, but it would not be performant enough. So the part that might need a proposal is any change to core. Yet the proposal does not really make that point clear. I've posted on the GitHub thread. Richard

On Jun 23, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:

Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 23.06.2020, 12:14 +0300 schrieb Vitaly Bragilevsky:

...

This proposal boils down to adding several quasiquoters, available with the QuasiQuotes GHC extension. I don't think that this is in the scope of our Committee. I think that we should make this proposal dormant in case it turns out somehow different. At least now we have nothing to discuss, I believe.

========= ByteArray Literals has been proposed by Andrew Martin (based on a proposal by Oleg Grenus) https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/292 https://github.com/andrewthad/ghc-proposals/blob/bytearray-literals/proposal... =========

if that’s the case, then yes, we could mark it as “non-proposal” and invite the authors to take this onto the GHC bug tracker.

Could someone with more expertise on Template Haskell etc. have a brief look and discern if this is proposal material or not?

Cheers, 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