28 Oct
2007
28 Oct
'07
5:42 p.m.
Simon Marlow
Looks like an orthogonal issue to me. Am I missing something?
Probably it could be made clearer. In 4.2 the idea is that instead of replacing
base-2.0 ==> base-3.0 + directory-1.0 + array-1.0 + ...
you would replace
base-2.0 ==> newbase-1.0 + directory-1.0 + array-1.0 + ...
That's pretty clear, thanks. Couldn't you still do this by recompiling the libraries, *if* the re-exporting feature turns out to be stumbling block.
Thinking about this is really making my head hurt, I need to go back to doing something easy like writing Haskell :-)
If it leads to better/more robust libraries, I'm happy to pick up the bill for that bottle of aspirin. :-) -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants