* Christian Maeder
Perhaps I missed something. Can someone please explain why do we have to have two different third parsecs? Should one of them be deprecated? When would a user prefer one to another?
parsec-2 (and possibly its compatibility layer) may be deprecated or superseded at some stage.
I read the description of parsec3 package on hackage, it tries to give some explanation, but still:
1. It's not clear why "you may want to develop your code using this subset of parsec3 modules". What advantage does it give?
The parsec3 package only ensures that you are not using the compatibility layer for parsec2 given by the modules Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec*, because parsec3 code developed with these modules might not work with parsec2 or parsec-2.x.
From the description of parsec3 on hackage
[...] I do not recommend to unconditionally use parsec3 as dependency in cabal files of packages for hackage. But you may want to develop your code using this subset of parsec3 modules and finally change the dependency from parsec3 to parsec-3.1.1 [...] I got an impression that parsec3 should be used only during the development, not in a released package. But as a developer of a package I have pretty good understanding of what modules I'm using, and if in doubt I can simply run "grep -r Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec ." Maybe it would become more clear if you elaborate on who and how exactly might benefit from this package? Thanks, Roman -- Roman I. Cheplyaka :: http://ro-che.info/ Don't worry what people think, they don't do it very often. In-Reply-To: <4D467427.1000104@dfki.de>