If we can eventually make some headway on the split base proposal, then eventually we might be able to let parts of base split off into separate packages that can update at different rates. With that a change to the behavior of, say, something in STM, doesn't need to affect code that is written to a much smaller subset of the library, and so that people who are building Haskell compilers for non-posix-like backends can perhaps have a smaller set of things they'd have to implement out of the gate. Alas, as you noted, that isn't the world we have to day. -Edward On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:58 AM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:

On 28 Jan 2015, at 09:53, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:

...

On 28 January 2015 at 10:16, Greg Fitzgerald wrote:

...

If BBP is going to be released as-is, can we please call the next release GHC 8.0?

Isn't this actually detailing changes to base rather than GHC as a compiler?

The versions of GHC and the base library are inextricably linked. You can't change the base library and keep the same compiler version. (I don't think that is a good situation, but it is the way things stand.)

Regards, Malcolm _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries