<div dir="ltr">Note, the haskell98 and haskell2010 packages would be unaffected by this proposal as it stands.<div><br></div><div style>The (repeatedly raised in this thread) Applicative as a superclass of Monad situation on the other hand, sadly does impact them.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>-Edward</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Henning Thielemann <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de" target="_blank">lemming@henning-thielemann.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br>
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So there's a decision-making vacuum for the "GHC HQ" libraries. If that's the case, then the best thing is for GHC HQ to get out of the way!<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
In the special case of adding Traversable and Foldable to Prelude, it worries me that it is about changing Prelude. I am more relaxed about changes to 'base'. However, since Prelude is part of the Haskell 98 and Haskell 2010 specification, I thought that changing Prelude could also be decided by the Haskell Prime committee.<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org" target="_blank">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>