The case of WASH is a pity. Architecturally It was more advanced that many recent haskell web frameworks.  The package would have been a success with little changes in the DSL syntax.

I suspect that there are many outstanding packages with great ideas abandoned, like WASH

 

2013/5/5 Brandon Allbery <allbery.b@gmail.com>

On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Raphael Gaschignard <dasuraga@gmail.com> wrote:

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I feel like I've seen such "suggestions" in GHC errors before.

If so, does that mean there's some sort of mechanism in the compiler already in place for such error recognition? Like some simple pattern stuff?  If not, I think that it might not be bad to consider this stuff (misused packaged, changed semantics that create compiler errors), and to put something into place for future modifications. This could make it a lot easier to deal with unmaintained code.

There's some very limited capability now; the GHC folks are tossing around ideas for something more general like that.

--

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates

allbery.b@gmail.com                                  ballbery@sinenomine.net

unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

--
Alberto.

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe