[ghc-steering-committee] Fine-Grained Unused Warnings (#42)

[Moritz Angermann]

Sorry for the late reply. Last week was LNY week 😓 Just catching up on all
the work and other stuff.

I'm with Eric, that this seems fine. And while the -f / -W part is
discussed in the alternatives section, I can see reasons for both.

Guess we'll have to see how this plays out. I'm fine with -f or -W and as
such +1 from me.

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 05:21, Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io> wrote:

> I'm generally fine with this proposal, but does it seem strange to anyone
> else that this is a -f flag rather than a new set of -W flags?
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024, at 02:23, Chris Dornan wrote:
> > Indeed — just a gentle reminder that the deadline for amending or
> > objecting to this proposal is this coming Monday 19th.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >> On 15 Feb 2024, at 07:58, Arnaud Spiwack <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> For the record, Jakob has amended the proposal with the flag on by
> default. I'm now fully good with the proposal.
> >>
> >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 14:22, Chris Dornan <chris at chrisdornan.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Thanks Arnaud — I agree with you and have said as much in the thread
> and asked Jakob to clarify.
> >>>
> >>>> On 13 Feb 2024, at 16:57, Arnaud Spiwack <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I noticed that the default value of the flag is unspecified (I
> believe that the flag should be on by default, as deactivating transitively
> unused bindings is pretty situational in my opinion; we may even decide to
> accept the proposal but without the flag, though I have a feeling that the
> author wouldn't be willing to implement the flagless version). I made a
> comment to that effect on Github.
> >>>>
> >>>> The rest of the proposal looks good to me.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 at 11:59, Chris Dornan <chris at chrisdornan.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Proposal: Fine-Grained Unused Warnings (#42)
> >>>>> Author: Jakob Brünker
> >>>>> Rendered proposal:
> https://github.com/JakobBruenker/ghc-proposals/blob/fine-grained-unused/proposals/0000-fine-grained-unused-warnings.rst
> >>>>> Discussion: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/434
> >>>>> Recommendation: Acceptance
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ## Summary
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The proposal partitions warning about unused identifiers into
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a) bindings that are truly unused (not mentioned anywhere) and
> >>>>> b) bindings that are mentioned exclusively in code that is itself
> (transitively) unused,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and suppresses the latter unless the
> -freport-indirectly-unused-bindings flag is specified.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The proposal is concise with some well-chosen examples and I
> recommend everyone at least skim it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I propose        that we accept this proposal if nobody objects by
> the start of next week (Monday, 2024-02-19).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Chris
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> >>>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> >>>>>
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Arnaud Spiwack
> >>>> Director, Research at https://moduscreate.com and https://tweag.io.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Arnaud Spiwack
> >> Director, Research at https://moduscreate.com and https://tweag.io.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> > ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20240221/8b46c91a/attachment.html>