bulat.ziganshin at gmail.com
Fri Mar 16 05:31:23 EDT 2007
Friday, March 16, 2007, 12:09:49 PM, you wrote:
> Unlike a lot of other languages (like Java) which grow incrementally,
> heaving the whole lot of old baggage in their library API, GHC base is
> allowed to evolve its interfaces (and yes, that breaks compatibility). I
> think it is a healthy approach, while the Java approach might bloat it
> to death (sadly, as i'm a Java user; at least the bytecode seem remains
> in good shape).
> Sorry if it seem like offtopic, but i think the ability of GHC base to
> evolve, instead of just bloating away, is vital.
this creates problems for developers and users. for example, program
developed 3 years ago, may be easily incompatible with current ghc
instead, i propose to keep evolving things outside of base, which will
allow to use any version of any library with any ghc version. if you
build something written in times of ghc 6.2 - you use old version of
library. if you build something more modern - you use newer version.
cabal automatically handles keeping of multiple versions of same
library and using proper version for each build. this technology
provides us *both* evolving of libraries and compatibility with old
Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com
More information about the Libraries