On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:31:42AM +0000, Eric Kow wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm going to gratefully apply these, but I thought I might throw
> in a couple more to go with Christian's review.
Thanks

> Please submit a type signature for this function in a future patch.
> I've updated http://wiki.darcs.net/index.html/CodingStyle with a
> request for top-level type signatures :-)
It's there...

src/Darcs/Arguments.lhs
 468 pipe_interactive, all_pipe_interactive, all_interactive, all_patches, 
interactive, pipe,
...
 475   output, output_auto_name, unidiff, repo_combinator,
 476   unified, summary, uncompress_nocompress, subject, in_reply_to,     <---- 
here :) <-----
 477   nocompress, match_several_or_range, match_several_or_last,
...
 481   logfile, rmlogfile, leave_test_dir, from_opt, set_default, pristine_tree
 482 
 483       :: DarcsOption

Maybe it's better to split this blob and put each type signature near
definition?

> > +make_email :: String -> [(String, String)] -> (Maybe Doc) -> Doc -> (Maybe 
> > String) -> Doc
> > +make_email repodir headers mcontents bundle mfilename =
> 
> I wonder if this headers field can be used for futher refactoring of the
> darcs email sending code.  Note also that we like to encouarage people
> to haddock functions too (because we have a bit of an API documentation
> deficit).

Unfortunately I've never used haddock and make_email function was
missing documentation. So I've not added description of headers argument
to it. 

                                Pavel
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

Reply via email to