Haskell Foundation Stability Working Group

[hasufell]

@AntC2

The sky is not falling. I see you evaded my direct question “Which of these groups of users would you put yourself in?”.

I have written a lengthy post explaining it, but it appears you didn’t respond to any of it, but cherry-picked on one of my examples.

[hasufell]

@atravers

As for trying to define a new fixed standard just for the language, all the language extensions now in use across Haskell libraries far and wide would appear to leave future standardisers with a dilemma:

• keep the language relatively compact, and most likely break every library in existence;
• support as many libraries as possible, and most likely end up with a big, bloated language.

Yes. I think a fair compromise is to focus only on boot libraries. That doesn’t mean everything that is in boot libraries needs to land in a new standard, but it gives a good overview on libraries that are used by almost everything.

When certain extensions are deemed unfit for the standard, e.g. because they are actually not that well-defined, we have to figure out if those extensions are actually crucial for those libraries or if they can be implemented without them.