I agree 100% with you. We absolutely do intend to support 6.4.2 as a stable compiler for a long time yet. But this particular bug has been in the compiler for years, and only reported once. I very much doubt that anyone will even notice whether or not we fix 6.4.2. Still, if any two people (counting you as one) think they will notice, we'll certainly do it! Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Bulat Ziganshin [mailto:bulatz@HotPOP.com] | Sent: 06 February 2006 19:39 | To: Simon Peyton-Jones | Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | Subject: Re[2]: [GHC] #649: class declaration accepts conop as method name | | Hello GHC, | | Monday, February 06, 2006, 7:59:24 PM, you wrote: | G> #649: class declaration accepts conop as method name | G> Type: bug | Status: closed | | G> Fixed in HEAD but wont't fix in 6.4.2 | | why you are not fixing this bug in 6.4.2? imho, we need to have more | stable GHC versions that can be used by the "real world" developers | like Joel Reymont just to work on their projects without reporting | each week new problem he is found in "stable" branch | | i/m trying to say that for wider GHC usage it should be more stable | than feature-rich and all new features that implemented in 6.4 or will | be implemented in 6.6 don't overweight for developers of large, | commercial apps importance of compiler stability and bug-free. i think | that GHC team should support previous version of compiler as long as | new version don't proved that it is bug-free. in this respect, even | 6.4 cannot be considered as stable version - it contains a number of | known and yet unfixed bugs and more arised as time goes. and at this | time you don't fix errors even in this version. so, that version of | GHC can be used to work on commercial projects? | | -- | Best regards, | Bulat mailto:bulatz@HotPOP.com | |