nick at microsoft.com
Fri Nov 26 07:12:28 EST 2004
Genuinely inspiring though it is to observe the vitality of the Haskell community, especially by comparison with we taciturn SML folks, recent discussions on top-level initialization etc. have got a bit high-bandwidth for the casual lurker. I really don't want to unsubscribe, so might I politely, respectfully and gently reiterate Simon's request that such skirmishes move to Haskell Café after the first few volleys have been exchanged? That's what it's there for.
Peace and purity,
From: haskell-bounces at haskell.org [mailto:haskell-bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of Graham Klyne
Sent: 26 November 2004 11:27
To: Lennart Augustsson
Cc: The Haskell Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Haskell] A puzzle and an annoying feature
At 19:14 25/11/04 +0100, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>Graham Klyne wrote:
>>I have a concern with this, if I understand the issue correctly.
>>Suppose I have a source module that compiles and runs correctly.
>>Now suppose I add a restricted (selective) import statement to the file,
>>explicitly introducing a name that I know does not clash with anything in
>>my module. I expect the module to continue to compile and run correctly.
>>If I understand Lennart's proposal correctly, adding such an import could
>>cause the compilation to fail, by adding new instance options that then
>>needs to be disambiguated.
>Not in my particular case. The class is local to the module. Any
>instance declaration would have to be in that module.
OK, I missed that.
But, it seems to me, that adding export of the class concerned to the
module heading could raise a similar scenario to that mentioned. It's less
clear-cut, but it seems surprising to me that the choice of whether or not
to export something from a module should (potentially) change its meaning
Haskell mailing list
Haskell at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell