Warning suppression pragmas

Alexey Shmalko rasen.dubi at gmail.com
Mon Oct 26 20:59:46 UTC 2015


I think SUPPRESS could be enough.

Hope this helps

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Эдгар Жаворонков
<edzhavoronkov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ben!
> Thanks for your feedback
> I thought a little and fixed some in wiki page
> In my opinion SUPPRESS_WARNINGS is not a real long name for pragma, but i
> can't come up with whort name that clearly describes purpose of such pragma
> =(
> Your suggestions are really welcome)
> ---
> С уважением,
> Жаворонков Эдгар
> Best regards,
> Edgar A. Zhavoronkov
> 2015-10-26 19:45 GMT+03:00 Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com>:
>> Эдгар Жаворонков <edzhavoronkov at gmail.com> writes:
>> > Hello Richard!
>> >
>> > Can you take a look at some sort of specification i wrote week ago?
>> > I placed it here:
>> > https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Design/LocalWarningPragmas
>> > I can imagine only two use cases, and i'm not sure about correcteness of
>> > it
>> >
>> Thanks for writing this up!
>> The specification is a good start but it really needs more detail. For
>> instance, what syntactic elements do you want this pragma to apply to?
>> Bindings? Expressions? Top-level definitions like classes, types, and
>> instances? Any lexical scope?
>> It would be nice if the use-cases you mention were a bit more concrete.
>> It wouldn't hurt to mention particular warnings that you might imagine
>> that this would be useful for.
>> It would likely be useful to draw inspiration from some of the schemes
>> used by other languages listed on the ticket (Rust and C# IIRC). It
>> wouldn't hurt to draw attention to the similarities and differences to
>> these other schemes in the proposal text.
>> On a more bike-shed-y note, `SUPPRESS_WARNINGS` is arguably a bit on the
>> long side.
>> Personally I would prefer not to see the pragma be bracketed as you
>> propose in your last example as its effect then becomes quite
>> "non-local". This pragma should, in my opinion, be a tool of precision,
>> used sparingly for well-understood reasons. Allowing bracketed regions
>> makes it too easy for definitions to "sneak in" to the supressed region,
>> hiding legitimate warnings. In the interest of keeping the proposal
>> concrete and concise I would either remove this alternative or move it
>> to a dedicated "Alternatives" section.
>> I'm looking forward to seeing what becomes of this. You might consider
>> submitting the next iteration of the proposal to the Haskell subreddit
>> to get a few more eyes on it. Onwards!
>> Cheers,
>> - Ben
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list