-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I like symmetry. +1 from me.
- --
Alexander
alexan...@plaimi.net
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
On 2014-10-26 at 20:28:41 +0100, Tom Murphy wrote:
[...]
I propose that instead, we're able to simply say what we mean:
module Foo hiding (Lockbox(MkLockbox), internalFunction) where
I think its semantics are immediately clear to the reader.
There's a little bit of bikeshedding that
+1 from me
I was looking for the feature a few times.
On 26 October 2014 19:28, Tom Murphy amin...@gmail.com wrote:
(Not to be confused with the hiding import behavior discussion also
going on)
--
Currently, I'm able to write module Foo where to export everything
defined in Foo.
If,
On 2014-10-26 at 20:28:41 +0100, Tom Murphy wrote:
[...]
module Foo hiding (Lockbox(MkLockbox), internalFunction) where
I think its semantics are immediately clear to the reader.
There's a little bit of bikeshedding that needs to happen (e.g. is hiding
(Foo(..)) sufficient to hide the
Hi Tom,
+1
There's a little bit of bikeshedding that needs to happen (e.g. is hiding
(Foo
(..)) sufficient to hide the type Foo and not just its constructors), but are
people +1 on this? I've frequently wanted this behavior.
I would be surprised if 'Foo(..)' would mean in this case
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Daniel Trstenjak
daniel.trsten...@gmail.com wrote:
There's a little bit of bikeshedding that needs to happen (e.g. is hiding
(Foo
(..)) sufficient to hide the type Foo and not just its constructors), but
are
people +1 on this? I've frequently wanted this
El Oct 27, 2014, a las 7:42, Herbert Valerio Riedel h...@gnu.org escribió:
On 2014-10-26 at 20:28:41 +0100, Tom Murphy wrote:
[...]
module Foo hiding (Lockbox(MkLockbox), internalFunction) where
I think its semantics are immediately clear to the reader.
There's a little bit of
El Oct 27, 2014, a las 9:57, Erik Hesselink hessel...@gmail.com escribió:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Daniel Trstenjak
daniel.trsten...@gmail.com wrote:
There's a little bit of bikeshedding that needs to happen (e.g. is hiding
(Foo
(..)) sufficient to hide the type Foo and not just its
+1.
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Tom Murphy amin...@gmail.com wrote:
(Not to be confused with the hiding import behavior discussion also
going on)
--
Currently, I'm able to write module Foo where to export everything
defined in Foo.
If, though, I add to the module some definitions
(Not to be confused with the hiding import behavior discussion also going
on)
--
Currently, I'm able to write module Foo where to export everything
defined in Foo.
If, though, I add to the module some definitions which I don't want to
export...
data Lockbox = MkLockbox Int
Strong +1 from me, this is *especially* annoying when you want to selectively
re-export parts of a module from somewhere or in case of exports generated by
TH.
Cheers,
Merijn
On 26 Oct 2014, at 12:28, Tom Murphy amin...@gmail.com wrote:
(Not to be confused with the hiding import behavior
11 matches
Mail list logo