On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, wren ng thornton wrote:
Gwern Branwen wrote:
See http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/640
It seems to me that a warning on using the 'haskell98' package wouldn't be a bad thing; those modules have since been split apart in better modules, the names are ever more unfamiliar, etc.
But Duncan thinks it merits discussion.
I'm all for the warnings. And regarding guest's comments, doesn't the Haskell 2010 standard[1] count as an "actual language standard"? If not, then what is it and why isn't it one?
Actually, when using GHCi I like to have the short Haskell98 module names. In contrast to that when writing a package for real use, that is, when I use Cabal, then Cabal might warn that the package haskell98 is deprecated. Even more deprecating a package by a Cabal field would be a nice thing and then haskell98 could be deprecated this way.