On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 09:22:37PM +0100, Axel Simon wrote:
In the case of the layout "bug", I think it might be worth considering going the other way: adjusting the standard with what ghc has always done.
Anyone can propose language changes - the process is described here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/Process
I therefore think that keeping the number of extensions to a minimum should be a high priority. It seems that the ghc team is going overboard with the amount of extensions and their granularity that I do not believe that there will ever be another compiler since implementing all these extensions is a nightmare. The road of may extensions is leading down the road that the Haskell standards aimed to avoid: having a single implementation defining what a Haskell program can be.
I'm not sure if you're saying there should be fewer new language features implemented, less fine-grained control over which are enabled, or something else? Thanks Ian