| 15 Sep 2025 |
 MangoIV | What does magichash have to do with portability | 13:16:04 |
| MangoIV | magichash is a purely syntactic extension | 13:16:21 |
 maralorn | Idk. I think the idea of macros/front loading as much as logic as possible to the compile step seems very intriguing to me. | 13:16:46 |
| MangoIV | implicitparams sounds like it is mostly relevant for HasCallStack. you can special case that if you want. | 13:17:01 |
 Teo (he/him) | It's always hard to kill off old code. I basically want to implement something (very vaguely) like Rust's facet for Haskell, and I think that could do it. I've been thinking about this for a while and it hasn't happened yet so we will see if it ever happens | 13:17:26 |
 emily | well half the time you turn it on to import some GHC.Evil is my point | 13:17:39 |
| MangoIV | i mean it's only relevant for projects the size of GHC - I don't understand how this seems to be low hanging fruit though. GHC is a mess... | 13:18:02 |
| Teo (he/him) | Yeah definitely. As a TH fan, one thing that quite annoys me is that TH isn't proper macros. It's a bunch of disparate features tacked together, and I really want to untangle the mess | 13:18:37 |
| emily | conceptually, yes. in practice language features that cordycept the compiler introduce a huge swathe of complexity and compromises unless you design everything around them from the start. because suddenly you have a bunch of exposed and very load-bearing phase distinctions | 13:18:45 |
