On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:06:57 +0000, Ian Lynagh
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:42:52AM +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Ian Lynagh wrote:
(Speaking as someone entirely unfamiliar with both packages, so this may be a crazy idea), I wonder if it might be better rename haskell-src-exts to haskell-src and for this to just be a major version bump. After all, nowadays more and more "extensions" are going to be part of the language, and who would actually use haskell-src once haskell-src-exts is part of the platform?
I am opposed to this proposal as stated.
The generated syntax tree of haskell-src-exts is huge and unmanageable if all you need is core haskell, or a subset thereof. I have used haskell-src in situations where haskell-src-exts would have been so much more work as to be unusable.
Also, it is very worthwhile to have code which describes exactly the syntax of standard Haskell. In fact, releasing an updated version of haskell-src should be a required step for each iteration of the Haskell Prime process.
In that case we presumably should have haskell98-src (== what is now haskell-src?) haskell2010-src (doesn't currently exist?) haskell-src (== haskell-src-exts)
It isn't actually necessary to rename haskell-src-exts, but haskell-src seems to me like a better name for it. I don't have a strong opinion, anyway.
This could be different modules of the same package as well. For instance one might want to convert from an Haskell 98 source into an Haskell 2010 one, or an Haskell "With Extensions" one. my 0.02 €, -- Nicolas Pouillard http://nicolaspouillard.fr