"Simon Marlow" writes:

...

I've updated the document at http://www.haskell.org/~simonmar/libraries/libraries.html to reflect some changes in how the libraries situation is evolving.

The latest version of the libraries document is looking good, and thanks for keeping it rolling Simon.

No problem!

In the section on Portability, bit-wise operations (i.e. Data.Bits) are noted as non-portable, yet as far as I'm aware they are supported by all the implementations now. Would anyone object if I move that bullet item to the section on "extensions that can be assumed portable"?

Yes, please do. I was vaguely aware that NHC had adopted Data.Bits, but hadn't got around to checking that fact.

Also, in section 4.4, the allocation of libraries to maintainers is a somewhat rough approximation, I'd say. No doubt we can gradually refine it. For instance, Debug.QuickCheck.* is currently allocated to this mailing list, but I'm sure it should really be under the control of John Hughes and Koen Claessen - I know that they are planning a new release soon.

Sure.

I have never heard of the System.DL library before, and couldn't guess from the name what functionality it aimed to provide. I had to go look at the source code to determine what it does! A definite candidate for clearer naming - I would suggest System.DynamicLinker or something along those lines.

Yes. System.DL is a Haskell interface to the Unix libdl library, which in fact appears to be part of the latest revision of the POSIX standard, so it should probably be called System.Posix.DyamicLinker. I just noticed on my ToDo list for System.Posix I have it down as System.Posix.DynamicLoader. Volker, what do you think about renaming it to one of these? Cheers, Simon