2011/12/6 Yves Parès <limestr...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > I noticed some time ago the fact that qualified imports doesn't affect the > generated documentation. > It's kind of clumsy in case of libraries that define a lot of synonyms > (vector and bytestring come in my mind first). > For instance, in the package utf8-string: > http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/utf8-string/0.3.7/doc/html/Data-ByteString-UTF8.html > > Here, the documentation doesn't say that the > utf8-string/Data.ByteString.UTF8.ByteString datatype used all along comes in > fact from Data.ByteString. > If it were instead a new implementation of ByteString (as for > bytestring/Data.ByteString.Char8.ByteString) the documentation would look > exactly the same, so to disambiguate to reader has to crawl through the code > to get to the initial definition. > (clicking on a 'ByteString' doesn't even redirect you to the original > bytestring/Data.ByteString page) > > It should be written that this 'ByteString' is not a newly defined type but > instead a re-exportation.
It should be simple to add some kind of "Re-export of <link to original thing>" tag to the Haddock documentation. Feel free to add a ticket for this feature to the issue tracker (trac.haskell.org/haddock) with a description of how it should work. > It's even worse when you see the doc of a module that uses in the meantime > lazy and strict ByteStrings, or normal and unboxed/storable/<insert flavour > here> vector: you have to hover the type name to see which haddock page it > points to. > > In that case, a solution might be to indicate on top of the doc page that it > uses another module as a qualified import, and to keep the prefixes in the > function signatures. Maybe. But have you tried experimenting with Haddock's --qual flag? David _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe