Proposal: Adding generics-based rnf-helper to `deepseq`

Ben Millwood haskell at
Sun Sep 23 17:31:44 CEST 2012

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 7:13 AM, wren ng thornton <wren at> wrote:
> I'm agnostic on the issue of including genericRnf rather than keeping the
> packages separate; but if it is included, I definitely think it ought to be
> put in a separate module. Having the API of a module depend on CPP/flags/...
> is a terrible maintenance issue--- for client code, I mean. But just having
> a module be absent/present makes the divide clear, and makes it a lot easier
> to work with.

I believe that Cabal is expressly designed so that exposed-modules
cannot change based on configuration of things. Can anyone suggest a
clear disadvantage for having the generics stuff remain in a separate
package? It seems like the least problematic solution to me so far.

More information about the Libraries mailing list