With 8.0.1 freshly arrived, I'm taking on the task of updating a number of
our larger projects here at Galois. I made a couple of these comments
briefly on a relevant Trac ticket[1], but I wanted to open this discussion
to a wider audience.
We tend to use -Wall (and -Werror, in CI environments), a
Agreed. Ive hit exactly these issues myself to the point where i err on
suppressing that warning in my code now. In part because i use those
unused constraints as a semantic contract.
On Friday, June 3, 2016, Adam Foltzer wrote:
> With 8.0.1 freshly arrived, I'm taking on the task of updating
I've been bitten by this too and had to disable the warning.
Let me propose an alternative;
* -Wredundant-constraints becomes only your Warning 1. That is, it reports when
a user writes a constraint that is fully equivalent to some other, strictly
smaller constraint, like suggesting simplifying
Strong emphatic agreement. Both that it should split up thusly and that the
latter shouldn't be in WALL. Otherwise it poisons the well for all be the
most sophisticated users of type level programming.
I don't suppose there's any hope of having this resolved prior to GHC 8.2
because it is a real u
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016, at 07:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> I don't suppose there's any hope of having this resolved prior to GHC 8.2
> because it is a real usability regression? Because I think we can all
> agree
> that the proposed change would not break any 8.0 series code, and
> positively impac
It's a tall ask, but why not?
On Jun 6, 2016 12:16 PM, "Eric Seidel" wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016, at 07:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> > I don't suppose there's any hope of having this resolved prior to GHC 8.2
> > because it is a real usability regression? Because I think we can all
> > agre
To better elaborate : I definitely want this for the next major version
i.e. 8.2.* , but I'm also wondering if perhaps the "overly constrained
type" warning should be flat out removed from Wall even in ghc 8.0.2,
On Monday, June 6, 2016, Carter Schonwald
wrote:
> It's a tall ask, but why not?
>
I strongly agree with per-declaration warning suppression. But I'd like to
leave both warnings on by default in -Wall.
1. Sometimes an upstream library will drop a constraint. The warning lets
me know I can drop it too.
2. Sometimes an implementation evolves from a draft that requires a
constrain
Either way, do we have a strong agreement that for ghc 8.2 that this
warning should be split up and the noiser part should be moved out of the
default wall set?
On Monday, June 6, 2016, Carter Schonwald
wrote:
> To better elaborate : I definitely want this for the next major version
> i.e. 8.2.
I don't have any personal experience with the new warning, but it does
sound to me like there are two separate warnings (redundant vs unused
constraints) combined under a single flag. So I would support separating
them!
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016, at 09:38, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> Either way, do we ha
10 matches
Mail list logo
