RE: Re[2]: [Haskell] proposal about declaring language version andlanguage extensions used in specific module
On 10 August 2005 08:03, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Ross,
Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 4:24:53 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:37:01PM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
I thought there was talk of a standardized {-# LANGUAGE ... #-} pragma somewhere.. but I can't seem to find it.
http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/haskell/2003-September/012692.html http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/libraries/2004-October/002589.html
of course, my proposed extension is very trivial. but compared to above mentioned variants, it moves definition of language used in module from pseudocomments to language itself. i also propose moving of all pragmas from pseudocomments to special language statements
The language declaration affects the grammar of the language, and even whether the source is preprocessed or not, so you can't put the declaration into the language itself. {-# LANGUAGE #-} is the right thing (and we should implement it in GHC, really). Cheers, Simon
Hello Simon, Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 6:27:45 PM, you wrote: SM> The language declaration affects the grammar of the language, and even SM> whether the source is preprocessed or not, so you can't put the SM> declaration into the language itself. {-# LANGUAGE #-} is the right SM> thing (and we should implement it in GHC, really). yes, you are right in both statements ;) my variant can be interesting only for Haskell 2.0, if we will need to break compatibility anyway -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:bulatz@HotPOP.com
participants (2)
-
Bulat Ziganshin -
Simon Marlow