<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif">I'd be happy to accept this one.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif">In fact I'd prefer it if</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif"><ul><li>-wpartial-record-selectors and -wpartial-record-updates were in -Wall</li><li>But -wpartial-fields should definitely not be in -Wall because there is absolutely nothing wrong with using named fields to help with pattern matching and record construction -- places were partiality is not an issue</li></ul><div>Simon<br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 7 Sept 2022 at 12:35, Richard Eisenberg <<a href="mailto:lists@richarde.dev">lists@richarde.dev</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">I also lean toward acceptance.<div><br></div><div>However, I'm a little worried about the flourishing of warnings not in -Wall. Ignoring -Weverything -- which tends to be over the top, even for the paranoid -- all of the extra warnings have to be enabled independently. Does it make sense to try to bring some structure to this area? Or maybe we say "no" and leave it to IDEs to impose that structure. Actually, I've already argued myself into that latter camp.</div><div><br></div><div>In any case, I vote to accept this proposal.</div><div><br></div><div>Richard<br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Aug 24, 2022, at 1:47 AM, Spiwack, Arnaud <<a href="mailto:arnaud.spiwack@tweag.io" target="_blank">arnaud.spiwack@tweag.io</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr">The proposal makes sense to me. I don't have a strong opinion, but I'm leaning towards acceptance.<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 8:14 PM Eric Seidel <<a href="mailto:eric@seidel.io" target="_blank">eric@seidel.io</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear Committee,<br>
<br>
Adam Gundry has proposed a new warning -Wincomplete-record-selectors[1] that would flag occurrences of partial record selectors, e.g. the field `x` in<br>
<br>
```<br>
data T = T1 { x :: Int, y :: Bool }<br>
       | T2 { y :: Bool }<br>
```<br>
<br>
The proposal is well-specified, will never warn about total selectors (e.g. `y` above), and allows for a smarter compiler to suppress warnings in cases where a partial selector is used in a total context (e.g. `x (T1 42 True)`).<br>
<br>
I recommend acceptance.<br>
<br>
[1]: <a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/516" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/516</a><br>
<br>
On Sun, Aug 14, 2022, at 13:01, Joachim Breitner wrote:<br>
> Dear Committee,<br>
><br>
> Introduce `-Wincomplete-record-selectors`<br>
> have been submitted by Adam Gundry<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/516" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/516</a><br>
> <a href="https://github.com/adamgundry/ghc-proposals/blob/incomplete-record-selectors/proposals/0000-incomplete-record-selectors.rst" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/adamgundry/ghc-proposals/blob/incomplete-record-selectors/proposals/0000-incomplete-record-selectors.rst</a><br>
><br>
> I suggest that Eric shepherds this proposal.<br>
><br>
> Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in <br>
> <a href="https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process</a><br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> Joachim<br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> Joachim Breitner<br>
>   <a href="mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de" target="_blank">mail@joachim-breitner.de</a><br>
>   <a href="http://www.joachim-breitner.de/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.joachim-breitner.de/</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br><a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br><a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
ghc-steering-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org" target="_blank">ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee</a><br>
</blockquote></div>