Hi
Just to say that I also like this design. A minor point would be; do we really need the parentheses and commas? or could we not just use indentation (I think this about module imports in general).
Yes, then you could just uses {a;b} to get the list which is actually a newline list. I think this would be even better for module declarations. For example, in the module I'm currently working on: module Hoogle.DataBase.TypeSearch.Graph( Graph, newGraph, GraphResult(..), ArgPos, Binding, graphSearch ) where I dislike the fact that ,'s come after every line but the last - it lacks consistency, and often requires 1 more line of diff when adding somethign (add comma to previous line, and add the line). I would rather write: module Hoogle.DataBase.TypeSearch.Graph{ Graph; newGraph GraphResult(..); ArgPos; Binding graphSearch } where However, I think the new syntax for modules, and the new type of declarations for modules, are separate issues.
Also I wouldn't mind 'as' for the names which are imported which would be a bit of a work around for the debate as to whether I should design my modules for qualified import or not. Suppose I make a 'NewList' module and use the default names then someone could do: import Data.NewList unqualified map as nlMap find as nlFind lookup as nlLookup
I believe old versions of Haskell had this, and it was considered too confusing. Consider: import Prelude unqualified (+) as (-) Also people reading the code will find it easier to know N = Data.NewList (one mapping), than three mappings as you have. Thanks Neil