[ghc-steering-committee] #451: WARNING pragma with category, Recommendation: accept

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

Am Donnerstag, dem 17.11.2022 um 11:17 +0100 schrieb Arnaud Spiwack:
> For the bikeshedding question, the mathematician in me believes that
> using `WARNING [partial]` is more canonical. Except that there is the
> `deprectations` category which is suppressed with `-Wno-deprecations`
> (the proposal solves this in saying that `-Wno-deprecations` is
> actually an alias for `-Wno-x-deprecations`, why not). Pragmatically,
> though, the more I think about it, the more I'm favouring enforcing
> that the warning author write `WARNING [x-partial]` (it is also
> permitted to write `[deprecations]` without an x, which would avoid
> introducing `x-deprecations` gratuitously). The explicitness here, I
> think, helps. The warning category would _always_ be called `x-
> partial`. It's easier to process, easier to google. The cost is tiny.

thanks for the input. I also have the sense that it will be easier to
understand the feature if users sees x-foo everywhere (source and
command lines), and it allows later extensions.

I’ll turn this into a suggestion on the PR.

Cheers,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/