4 ms·
I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing if they remain Haskell 2010 compliant and use pragmas for their own extensions. I certainly would like to see featur
by willtim 10y ago
I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing if they remain Haskell 2010 compliant and use pragmas for their own extensions. I certainly would like to see features like extensible records and variants; and this is unlikely to happen anytime soon in GHC, as the focus seems to be dependent types.
- rahulmutt 10y agoThis is exactly the direction we're going. I'm a big fan of extensible records/variants. We'll be supporting the GHC 8 extensions that are orthogonal to the type system refactoring like Strict, StrictData, etc. pretty much everything other than TypeInType.
- willtim 10y agoExciting stuff! The JVM really needs a modern statically typed functional language.
- moomin 10y agoI'd say the focus (as always) is on making GHC a better compiler. Join points, levity polymorphism and the new typeable improvements are all in that category. And there's an amazing amount of stuff under the hood in 8.2. Dependent types? 8.6, 8.4 if they're lucky.