[Haskell-cafe] PVP question
michael at snoyman.com
Wed Dec 17 08:24:21 UTC 2014
I appreciate everyone's input on this. I've decided I'm going to treat this
as a minor version bump, for the following reasons:
* It's unclear that *any* breakage will occur.
* If any breakage does occur, it should be trivial to fix in a backwards
* And while breakage is generally a bad thing, in this case, it would
likely be beneficial to the community if we got extra data out of the
exercise by having a build breakage result from this change.
If I hear any reports of breakage as a result of this change, I'll try to
remember to report them.
On Tue Dec 16 2014 at 11:48:41 AM Roman Cheplyaka <roma at ro-che.info> wrote:
> On 16/12/14 11:40, Erik Hesselink wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Roman Cheplyaka <roma at ro-che.info>
> >> On 16/12/14 00:31, Johan Tibell wrote:
> >>> So yes, if you use open imports and allow new minor versions, your code
> >>> might break. This is expected.
> >> One similarly could argue that "if you use functions in polymorphic
> >> contexts and allow new minor versions, your code might break".
> >> This isn't in the PVP, but it's exactly in the same spirit, IMO.
> > I think this is a bad idea, since a "polymorphic context" (even if
> > rigorously defined) is not clear from reading the code, you have to
> > type check it in your head. The import style, on the other hand, is
> > very simple to read and check if it matches the style of dependency
> > version ranges.
> Ok, this is a fair point.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe