Ivan Lazar Miljenovic writes:
> On 17 September 2013 09:35, Evan Laforge wrote:
snip
>> None of this is a big deal, but I'm curious about other's opinions on
>> it. Are there strengths to the separate export list that I'm missing?
>
> I do like the actual "summary" aspect as you've noted, as
> It also makes actual definitions cleaner/shorter rather than
> cluttering them with extra annotations (either PRAGMAs or
> public/private markers), though this is not that big of a deal.
It's true, though you could get it pretty short, e.g. default private
and leading ! for public. Go uses capi
On 17 September 2013 09:35, Evan Laforge wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Wvv wrote:
>> I suggest to add instead of (or with) export section Pragma EXPORT:
>
> I doubt this has much chance, since haskell already made its choice
> here a long time ago (and even if it were still up for dis
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Wvv wrote:
> I suggest to add instead of (or with) export section Pragma EXPORT:
I doubt this has much chance, since haskell already made its choice
here a long time ago (and even if it were still up for discussion,
PRAGMA isn't right for it), but this brings up a
I suggest to add instead of (or with) export section Pragma EXPORT:
We have 3 values: public, abstract and private.
Data(with newtypes and types,..) could be public, like `Data(...)` or
abstract `Data`.
Other cases abstract = public.
{-# EXPORT #-} pragma is valid till next {-# EXPORT #-}.
We
