API Annotations for pragmas

Simon Peyton Jones simonpj at microsoft.com
Fri Dec 5 09:48:24 UTC 2014

I’d combine them; but make sure you add a Note explaining the purpose of the extra fields is.  Maybe you can use the same Note


From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of Alan & Kim Zimmerman
Sent: 05 December 2014 08:55
To: ghc-devs at haskell.org
Subject: Re: API Annotations for pragmas

I already have an open diff in D538, covering haddock doc changes for the API annotations, and bringing in a `SourceText` field for HsTyLit.
Should I include the changes for SourceText in pragmas in D538, or create a new one?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Alan & Kim Zimmerman <alan.zimm at gmail.com<mailto:alan.zimm at gmail.com>> wrote:
It seems that pragma definitions in source are not only case insensitive, but can accept UK or US spelling variants.
I am going to need to capture SourceText values in the tokens, and bring them through into the AST.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20141205/f64c05b8/attachment.html>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list