John Peterson wrote:
[...] Any change to the Haskell standard is going to require a lot of effort. Haskell is what it is because so many people spent so much time getting things right. I would love to see a Haskell 2.0 someday - I hope that the process continues to be as rigorous as the one that let to Haskell 98.
Perhaps I should make my motivation clear again: I don't want to start a "Haskell 2.0, guerrilla edition" by a more or less uncoordinated effort. I just want precise, separate definitions of the common extensions in use to avoid fragmentation of the language. It would be very nice to say e.g. "Hugs, March 2005 edition, supports Haskell 98 + addenda Foo, Bar & Baz". Currently some systems have similar extensions, but not identical ones, e.g. fundeps in Hugs & GHC, IIRC. This really has to be avoided. Cheers, S.