On 27 Jun 2001, Alastair David Reid wrote:
[..]
2) We extend the package definition with a list of features used in the package.
Package { name = "net", extensions = [ "FFI", "ExceptionHandling", ... ], ... }
This seems to be a very clear, high level, specification. I'd vote for it, or something of this sort. It clearly specifies up front what is really needed to use a particular module and it does it in a human-readable format. Ideally, I'd like to see it as a part of future Haskell Report. Frankly, all those compiler switches - no matter how powerful and familiar they are to those using, GHC say, compiler - make me feel quite uncomfortable; they resemble a jungle of switches specific to GCC or to other specific C compilers. With all due respect, Haskell supposes to be both a high level language and a system of high level libraries - not something augmented by a set of low level rules about switches and macros. Jan