RFC: style cleanup & guidelines for GHC, and related bikeshedding

Joachim Breitner mail at joachim-breitner.de
Thu Jul 3 09:13:54 UTC 2014


Am Donnerstag, den 03.07.2014, 10:44 +0200 schrieb Jan Stolarek:
> Now, I understand people who don't want such change because of merge
> conflicts. But the truth is there will never be a good moment to
> implement such changes because there is always some ongoing 
> work and outstanding branches.

when I first looked at GHC code I also thought “ugh, ugly”. But I can
cope, it does not actually hinder me while working on GHC. On the other
hand, having a “detab and rename” horizon where merging patches from
before is much harder, and where "git log -L" and "git blame" fail to
work properly would be a hindrance. Also, backporting patches from GHC
HEAD to distribution releases would become annoying, for at least one
release cycle.

So my conclusion is that it’s ok to have the mess in the source code


Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.dehttp://www.joachim-breitner.de/
  Jabber: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de  • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F
  Debian Developer: nomeata at debian.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20140703/bb71d51d/attachment.sig>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list