I'm very much in favor of listing the exact extensions used in each file,
because I try to keep them to a minimum.
I would like to see a LANGUAGE Haskell' which includes the things that are
likely to be in Haskell' (if there is ever a Haskell').
-- Lennart
On Nov 20, 2007 9:42 PM, Alex Jacobson
I'm fine with that as well. I'm just opposed to being force to look up the precise names the compiler happens to use for each language extension I happen to use. Having -fglasgow-exts turned on by default also works.
-Alex-
Am Dienstag, 20. November 2007 22:15 schrieb Alex Jacobson:
.ehs stands for extended haskell and encapsulates the 90% case of
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: people
just wanting -fglasgow-exts with a minimum of fuss.
Having a filetype seesm better than the alternatives of either adding boilerplate language/options pragmas to the top of your source files or putting them in a cabal file.
-Alex-
And if a new Haskell standard is released, we have to rename lots of files from *.ehs to *.hs. :-(
Extended Haskell is Haskell in a different version. So it's still Haskell and should be put into *.hs files.
Best wishes, Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users