On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:20:10AM +0100, Ketil Malde wrote:
I don't think saving one line from each file in projects using alternative Preludes justify adding one line to each file in projects using the standard Prelude. If there is any reason to think custom Preludes will outnumber the standard one, I'll change my mind.
I very much agree. I can see the theoretical appeal of a minimal prelude, but I don't think it outweighs the practical and real advantages of a somewhat inclusive one. especially when the module system already makes it easy to hide names on import. Not that I wouldn't mind reevaluating what should be in the prelude, but I don't see the need for pushing towards a truely minimal one.
This sounds like yet another feature that is greatly interesting and wonderful to language hackers, and mostly annoying to the average programmer - partly by requiring extra overhead and boilerplate stuff, and partly by breaking old code.
Hey, I am a language hacker and would find it anoying :) I do find it quite bothersome that modules reexport things the prelude does, like List for instance rexporting (and,or,...) Things in the prelude are already in scope normally, if another module reexports them then it just anoys people that want to override them as they have to add hiding clauses to multiple imports. I would be very happy if we had a policy of making the exports from the standard libraries disjoint. In general, I don't think reexporting names from other modules is good style unless there is a very good reason. But I know others disagree with me on this, or at least have a different point at which they decide a reason is good enough :) John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈