I agree with Simon. - For QualifiedStrings, I vote accept. - For QualifiedNumerics, I left a comment https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/725#pullrequestreview-32... arguing for just the -XQualifiedDo bits. That requires amending the proposal, so I accept conditionally on this amendment. (Which in practice means "back to the author"??) - For QualifiedLists, I left a comment https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724#issuecomment-3315872... in order to settle the API questions that Simon raised. Also requires amending the proposal. Am Sa., 20. Sept. 2025 um 10:36 Uhr schrieb Matthías Páll Gissurarson < mpg@mpg.is>:

@Simon Peyton Jones

What do you mean by "not sure about precise API?"? Wait for the implementation and then amend the proposal?

Otherwise I'm in agreement, + QualifiedStrings: yes + QualifiedNumeric: yes, but no naturals + QualifiedLists: yes, with expectation that API will be clarified by implementation

On Fri, 19 Sept 2025 at 12:41, Simon Peyton Jones < simon.peytonjones@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Thanks Erik for driving us towards a conclusion

- QualifiedStrings: yes - QualifiedNumerics: yes but precisely as for QualifiedDo and QualifiedStrings, i.e. without new magic for natural numbers. - QualifiedLists: yes, but I'm not sure about the precise API

I have written comments on all three threads.

If you yourself have minor reservations, can you express them on the relevant GitHub threads?

Everyone: please express your views.

Simon

On Fri, 19 Sept 2025 at 01:28, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

...

Dear Committee,

The original Qualified Literals proposal [1] has been split into 3 separate proposals:

* Qualfied Strings [2] * Qualified Numerics [3] * Qualified Lists [4]

Since this proposal has already been open for so long and had so much discussion, I have recommened that the committee reaches a decision by Oct 7.

I had a few minor reservations about Numerics and Lists, mainly about the fact that there are still options on how they would be implemented but have recommended all 3 are accepted.

Thanks, Erik

[1] https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/698 [2] https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/723 [3] https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724 [4] https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/725 -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ _______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

-- -- Matthías Páll Gissurarson http://mpg.is/ _______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

This seems to be the growing consensus and I am fine with that. On 2025-09-21 18:39, Moritz Angermann wrote:

+ QualifiedStrings: Yes + QualifiedNumeric: Yes; Naturals excluded. + QualifiedLists: Yes.

On Sun, 21 Sept 2025 at 18:31, Sebastian Graf <[1]sgraf1337@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with Simon. * For QualifiedStrings, I vote accept. * For QualifiedNumerics, I left a [2]comment arguing for just the -XQualifiedDo bits. That requires amending the proposal, so I accept conditionally on this amendment. (Which in practice means "back to the author"??) * For QualifiedLists, I left a [3]comment in order to settle the API questions that Simon raised. Also requires amending the proposal.

Am Sa., 20. Sept. 2025 um 10:36 Uhr schrieb Matthías Páll Gissurarson <[4]mpg@mpg.is>:

[5]@Simon Peyton Jones

What do you mean by "not sure about precise API?"? Wait for the implementation and then amend the proposal?

Otherwise I'm in agreement, + QualifiedStrings: yes + QualifiedNumeric: yes, but no naturals + QualifiedLists: yes, with expectation that API will be clarified by implementation

On Fri, 19 Sept 2025 at 12:41, Simon Peyton Jones <[6]simon.peytonjones@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks Erik for driving us towards a conclusion * QualifiedStrings: yes * QualifiedNumerics: yes but precisely as for QualifiedDo and QualifiedStrings, i.e. without new magic for natural numbers. * QualifiedLists: yes, but I'm not sure about the precise API

I have written comments on all three threads.

If you yourself have minor reservations, can you express them on the relevant GitHub threads?

Everyone: please express your views.

Simon

On Fri, 19 Sept 2025 at 01:28, Erik de Castro Lopo <[7]erikd@mega-nerd.com> wrote:

Dear Committee,

The original Qualified Literals proposal [1] has been split into 3 separate proposals:

* Qualfied Strings [2] * Qualified Numerics [3] * Qualified Lists [4]

Since this proposal has already been open for so long and had so much discussion, I have recommened that the committee reaches a decision by Oct 7.

I had a few minor reservations about Numerics and Lists, mainly about the fact that there are still options on how they would be implemented but have recommended all 3 are accepted.

Thanks, Erik

[1] [8]https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/698 [2] [9]https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/723 [3] [10]https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724 [4] [11]https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/725 -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Erik de Castro Lopo [12]http://www.mega-nerd.com/ _______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- [13]ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to [14]ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- [15]ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to [16]ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

-- -- [17]Matthías Páll Gissurarson

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- [18]ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to [19]ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- [20]ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to [21]ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

References

1. mailto:sgraf1337@gmail.com 2. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/725#pullrequestreview-32... 3. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724#issuecomment-3315872... 4. mailto:mpg@mpg.is 5. mailto:simon.peytonjones@gmail.com 6. mailto:simon.peytonjones@gmail.com 7. mailto:erikd@mega-nerd.com 8. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/698 9. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/723 10. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/724 11. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/725 12. http://www.mega-nerd.com/ 13. mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org 14. mailto:ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org 15. mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org 16. mailto:ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org 17. http://mpg.is/ 18. mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org 19. mailto:ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org 20. mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org 21. mailto:ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

Thanks Erik -- very helpful. Simon On Tue, 30 Sept 2025 at 07:40, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

Hi all,

Trying to drive this forward.

The general consensus seems to be to accept QualifiedStrings. I would suggest that we accept this on October 7th unless someone yells before then.

There seems to be quite a few of reservations on QualifiedNumerics, with the main sticking point being the treatment of negative literals and natural numbers. I will consult with the proposer on this.

For QualifiedLists it seems we are even further from consensus. Again, I will consult with the proposer on this.

Cheers, Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ _______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list -- ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-steering-committee-leave@haskell.org

On Fri, 3 Oct 2025 at 07:23, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

...

Hi all,

Trying to drive this forward.

The general consensus seems to be to accept QualifiedStrings. I would suggest that we accept this on October 7th unless someone yells before then.

There seems to be quite a few of reservations on QualifiedNumerics, with the main sticking point being the treatment of negative literals and natural numbers. I will consult with the proposer on this.

For QualifiedLists it seems we are even further from consensus. Again, I will consult with the proposer on this.

Hi,

For the QualifiedStrings proposal I have "accept" votes from Simon Peyton Jones, Malte Ott, Matthías Páll Gissurarson, Sebastian Graf, Erik de Castro Lopo and Moritz Angermann.

I have not seen a response from Simon Marlow, Eric Seidel, Arnaud Spiwack, Arnaud Spiwack or Jakob Brünker. I have CCed the ones I do have email addresses for, but have no address for Eric Seidel or Jakob Brünker.

yes to QualifiedStrings. Cheers Simon

I am hoping to get the voting for QualifiedStrings done by October 7th.

The other two related proposals well be sent back to the proposer for review.

Thanks, Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/