
We have a fairly large list of proposals on the wiki, but in my opinion, we need to start to discuss how they interact with each-other, and what the "big ideas" of this standard are. I've identified two sets of proposals that need clarification or fixing. These are a sort of "meta proposal" that reference a handful of other proposals. solve the MultiParamTypeClassDilemma: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/90 bring together various class-related tickets into something coherent: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/93 Can we identify more? Here are all of the proposals: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/report/9 The categorization of proposals at that link is a first-pass at what might be in or out, and is just for discussion. My intuition (and a proposal) is that our job will be to: 1. conservatively standardize some of the most robust extensions, 2. clean up the class hierarchies and some libraries, 3. solve the MPTC dilemma (see above), and 4. pick one other "big idea" such as records or bang patterns. Thoughts? peace, isaac

Isaac Jones wrote:
My intuition (and a proposal) is that our job will be to:
1. conservatively standardize some of the most robust extensions, 2. clean up the class hierarchies and some libraries, 3. solve the MPTC dilemma (see above), and 4. pick one other "big idea" such as records or bang patterns.
Thoughts?
Given the amount of excitement and interest in new extensions (and in doing more than a conservative standard), I see a fifth goal: come up with some way of helping users and implementers cope with the complexity of lots of different (and sometimes conflicting) extensions. Some possibilities I see here are: (a) some standard, documented way for groups to come together to "bless" a widely-used extension (and, consequently, a way for people to find out what the blessed extensions are) (b) a way for programs to test what extensions are provided by their implementation (so users know what specific things a program depends on - rather than just saying you need some specific implementation) (c) a way for programs to conditionally configure themselves based on what extensions are available - so it is easier to write portable programs and libraries that use extensions beyond Haskell' The long-run hope I would have is that this sort of infrastructure might make the next standardization round easier - it will be more immediately obvious which extensions exist and where they belong in the process. - Ravi

Ravi Nanavati
Given the amount of excitement and interest in new extensions (and in doing more than a conservative standard), I see a fifth goal: come up with some way of helping users and implementers cope with the complexity of lots of different (and sometimes conflicting) extensions.
Along those lines, this ticket might be interesting: Unify various annotation proposals: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/91 peace, isaac
participants (2)
-
Isaac Jones
-
Ravi Nanavati