On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:34:37PM +0300, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
I like the Hugs behavior because it accepts more programs. OTOH, GHC's behavior may be a bit simpler to explain and implement(?). Any thoughts?
Currently, the class and datatype namespaces are considered the same by the standard. There is no particular reason this needs to be the case as they can always be disambiguated syntactically except in the one case of export/import lists. Some of the proposed module system changes for haskell' address this issue, which would allow fully separate namespaces for the two. Although I am not sure exactly what form it will take, I would like some reworking of the module system to allow this change in haskell'. There are some concrete proposals on the wiki, I have been meaning to make a grand unified proposal at some point that incorperates all the proposed changes (and incidentally, more importantly, proves compatibility between them) to the module system so that we may consider it. Not that I think all the proposals should go in or not as a unit, but it will give us a concrete theoretically implementable superset of all the proposals to think about and illuminate any interactions between proposals that might not be obvious when considered separately. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈