<div dir="ltr">Yes, but that leaves the an objection I have to this proposal requiring me personally to write an extra 1691 import lines -- based on the contents of my local development folder, to just get back up to par with the status quo.<div>
<br></div><div style>As a flag I can turn on in a package to get finer grained control? I'm totally for it! </div><div style><br></div><div style>As a source of <i>mandatory</i> boilerplate at the head of each module? It doesn't strike me as a good trade-off.</div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Ian Lynagh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ian@well-typed.com" target="_blank">ian@well-typed.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:41:44AM -0400, Edward Kmett wrote:<br>
> I'm definitely in favor of having the *option* to shut off the import of<br>
<div class="im">> the Prelude without entangling the notion of overriding all of the<br>
> desugarings.<br>
><br>
> I do, however, feel that removing the Prelude from base is a rather strong<br>
> step, which hasn't seen much support.<br>
<br>
</div>Just to clarify: This proposal is to stop importing the module<br>
implicitly, not to actually remove the module.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Ian<br>
--<br>
Ian Lynagh, Haskell Consultant<br>
Well-Typed LLP, <a href="http://www.well-typed.com/" target="_blank">http://www.well-typed.com/</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-prime mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Haskell-prime@haskell.org">Haskell-prime@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>