Re: Proposal: add `on` to the Prelude

I would ignore that comment actually, it's not well thought out. (I was roughly meaning that I don't want to write `import Prelude (x1, x2, ..., x500)`, but this isn't a valid argument as I don't actually explicitly import `Prelude` anyway). That said, I would still prefer as many symbols as possible to have explicit binding sites, which means I would prefer to be explicit about my import to `on` rather than assume it from the Prelude. On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 3:49 PM Helmut Schmidt wrote:

What do you mean by "I'd also rather that not be a huge single line from one module"? Can you elaborate how this relates to the proposal?

Am Mi., 11. Sept. 2019 um 14:45 Uhr schrieb Oliver Charles :

...

I would prefer *everything* to have an explicit import "binding site", and I'd also rather that not be a huge single line from one module (though of course, I can break the import up other multiple lines).