[Haskell-cafe] PVP question
adam at bergmark.nl
Mon Dec 15 12:19:26 UTC 2014
Woah i shouldn't be nitpicky when I'm confused :-) Sorry.
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Adam Bergmark <adam at bergmark.nl> wrote:
> To be nitpicky myFunction >>= \() -> x would break. It's unlikely that
> anyone uses it like this, but I've been on the safe side in the past and
> major bumped for cases like this. I think it's unwise to take shortcuts in
> the other direction.
> - Adam
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com>
>> I think the question is: can this change cause existing code to stop
>> compiling (perhaps assuming people aren't using -Werror)? I don't think it
>> can but perhaps generalizing the type could make type inference fail
>> somewhere due to an ambiguous type.
>> We really need a PVP guide that just lists lots of examples, each with a
>> note of what kind of change it is (i.e. major, minor, or patch).
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Michael Snoyman <michael at snoyman.com>
>>> I'm a little bit uncertain of the PVP guidelines in a certain case,
>>> so I'd like to get some guidance/clarity. Suppose I have a library which
>>> provides the function:
>>> myFunction :: IO ()
>>> myFunction = forever $ putStrLn "Still here" >> threadDelay 10^6
>>> Later, I realize (or someone points out to me) that I've over-specified
>>> the type signature, and really myFunction should be:
>>> myFunction :: IO a
>>> In this case, does the PVP specify that we should have a minor or a
>>> major version bump? I'm not certain if this counts as a breaking change or
>>>  https://github.com/fpco/streaming-commons/pull/13
>>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe