Am So 15.03.2026 17:17 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs: > Friends > > As part of the reinstallable base project I'm adding an > extension "ImplicitKnownKeyNames" to GHC.
Hi, Simon! While not being directly related to your question, let me add that I think that `ImplicitKnownKeyNames` doesn’t seem to be a good name for a future language extension, because it refers to a detail of the implementation of a particular compiler (GHC). As someone who hasn’t been involved in GHC development, I can somewhat imagine the effect of such a language extension identifier on ordinary Haskell users. I think that for pretty much all of them it must be confusing: “What are those keys? In what way are they known? What names are we talking about, and how can they relate to those known keys? In what way are they implicit?” I think that a language extension should really have an identifier that refers to what the extension means for *users* and generally makes sense independently of GHC. Given that the matters of known-key names are deeply related to GHC, I wonder whether an ordinary flag instead of a language extension is actually the way to go. All the best, Wolfgang _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
