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 <alex@alexjacobson.com> wrote:
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-

Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 20. November 2007 22:15 schrieb Alex Jacobson:
>> .ehs stands for extended haskell and encapsulates the 90% case of 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