Cmm comments are not Haddock comments---should this change?
nr at cs.tufts.edu
Tue Oct 19 18:05:33 UTC 2021
The definitions of the Cmm data structures are richly commented in
the source code, but the comments are not Haddock comments, so the
information doesn't make it into the Haddock documentation.
As I refresh my memory about Cmm, I'm thinking of converting the
existing comments to Haddock comments. The only downside I can think
of is that the Haddock pages may appear more cluttered.
Is there any reason I should refrain?
More information about the ghc-devs