<div>> This is a call for consensus. Do we agree to add</div><div>> </div><div>> infixr 6 <></div><div><br></div><div>+1</div><div><br></div><div>Johan wrote:</div><div><br></div><div><div>> Renaming return to pure would break lots of</div>
<div>> code. Adding <> doesn't have anywhere near the same implications.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">Yitzchak wrote:</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
It looks like Johan will soon be committing a disruptive change<br>
that will break many packages. </blockquote><div><br></div><div>What are those many packages that will break?</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Is it necessary for the semigroups<br>
package to change the name of <> in order to make it<br>
possible to fix the broken packages in a reasonable way, </blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why aren't proper imports (as mentioned earlier by Johan) enough to let both versions of <> coexist?</div><div><br></div>
<div>Sebastian</div></div>