RE: [Haskell] Hierarchical module namespace extensionnotsufficiently flexible

On 10 March 2005 00:14, Iavor Diatchki wrote:

...

I'm not in favour of this proposal, i.e. point (2) from your original message[1]. I don't think I fully understand it: is there a mistake in the last example of point (2)? The other examples can be achieved in a clearer way with a 'qualified module' export.

[1] http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/libraries/2005-March/003404.html I am not sure if it is a good idea either. There indeed was a bug in

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 23:09:26 -0000, Simon Marlow wrote: the last example of both (2) and (3), the imports should both have an "as T" in the end.

The difference between (2) and (3) is what _unqualified_ names get introduced in the importing module. In (2) one would get unqualified names as usual, but the qualified names would have an additional prefix. In (3) there is no way to get unqiualified names at all. I am not sure that there are situations where (2) is neccessary, but I don't think this effect can be achieved using only (3). I agree that we should perhaps go with the simplest and only have alternative (3).

I challenge you to find something you can do with (2) but not with the existing module system + 'qualified module' exports. On the other hand, if you don't care about (2), can we forget about it and simplify the discussion? I don't think anyone else was asking for it. Cheers, Simon