Modules and their explicit export lists (are an annoyance)
aslatter at gmail.com
Mon Jun 21 19:34:06 EDT 2010
I encourage you to email the lists or the library maintainer before forking
- ther might be ways to solve your problem in a different way or to get the
On Jun 21, 2010 4:20 PM, "Christian Höner zu Siederdissen" <
choener at tbi.univie.ac.at> wrote:
Thanks everybody for your thoughts. Based on what I've read this is what
I will do:
- fork a 'foreign' library, if I need to extend it substantially
- export everything explicitly
- or set namespaces like this:
- Library (with the more stable interface)
- Library.Internal (which exports everything)
Because of the rather good versioning system of Cabal (like
library=x.y.z) this seems to be the most practical solution for me.
Though it still would be nice if I could inject functions into other
peoples' namespaces -- so to speak ;-)
* Christian Höner zu Siederdissen <choener at tbi.univie.ac.at> [19.06.2010
> Hi everybody,
> I'd like some input on other peoples' thoughts on this. Recently, I
> played around with a library that uses an explicit export list. While
> there are reasons for havi...
> But the more important thing is, that it makes extending module
> functionality a pain (eg. if a c...
> Btw. there are libraries, where an explicit export list is used, that
> export the right amount of...
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users