|
|
|
|
|
This page summarises our current proposal for packages in GHC.
|
|
This page summarises our current proposal for packages in GHC. See also Brian Hulley's alternative proposal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
## The problem
|
|
## The problem
|
|
|
|
|
... | @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ It is perfectly OK to export entities, or whole modules, imported from other pac |
... | @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ It is perfectly OK to export entities, or whole modules, imported from other pac |
|
### Syntax
|
|
### Syntax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should package names be in quotes? Probably not. They have a well-defined syntax.
|
|
Should package names be in quotes? Probably yes, because they have a different lexcal syntax to the rest of Haskell. ("foo-2.3" would parse as three tokens, "foo", "-", and "2.3".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's been suggested that one might want to import several modules from one package in one go:
|
|
It's been suggested that one might want to import several modules from one package in one go:
|
... | @@ -195,9 +195,4 @@ Indeed, we could allow this multiple form even for ordinary imports: |
... | @@ -195,9 +195,4 @@ Indeed, we could allow this multiple form even for ordinary imports: |
|
|
|
|
|
```wiki
|
|
```wiki
|
|
import { A(f); B(g); C(S,T) }
|
|
import { A(f); B(g); C(S,T) }
|
|
```
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
|
## Alternative proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An alternative proposal is GhcPackagesAlternativeProposal? |
|
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
|
|