I think it's more of a readability thing, than replacing symbols for fun.

--
Markus Läll

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Christian Maeder <Christian.Maeder@dfki.de> wrote:
Am 30.03.2011 15:31, schrieb Roel van Dijk:
Hi,

The UnicodeSyntax extension was already supported by GHC 6.8.1. I just
released a new version of base-unicode-symbols (0.2.1.2) which also
works with base-3.0. This means you can now build the package with GHC
6.8.1 and with every newer release.

The base-unicode-symbols package itself is usually an internal
dependency. It is not part of the interface of any of its reverse
dependencies. Because it is a tiny package the build times are
insignificant. On my system a "cabal install base-unicode-symbols"
takes 2 seconds and takes up 300KB of disk space.

To conclude: Whether some package X depends on base-unicode-symbols or
not doesn't matter from the perspective of the users of said package
X.

Still such toy stuff does not belong into production code and is possibly just a stupid burden for other tools processing haskell source code.

C.


On 29 March 2011 20:54, Neil Mitchell<ndmitchell@gmail.com>  wrote:
I'm sort of shocked by the many dependencies (already via http-types) on
blaze-builder, text, case-insensitive and (really unnecessarily) on
base-unicode-symbols.

As far as I am aware, base-unicode-symbols only works on GHC 6.12 and
above. For Hoogle, which uses WAI, I deliberately try and work on GHC
version 6.10 as well - GHC 7 is only very just out, and a version
which is basically functional for most users has only been released in
the last week - making 6.10 effectively the release before last.
Excluding 6.10 for good reasons is fine, excluding it for a fairly
unnecessary dependency makes me sad.

Thanks, Neil

_______________________________________________
web-devel mailing list
web-devel@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel