Hi all,
I've just released HLint 2.1.11 which supports three different forms
of pragma as per https://github.com/ndmitchell/hlint#ignoring-hints,
so you can write:
* {-# ANN module "HLint: ignore Eta reduce" #-}
* {-# HLINT ignore "Eta reduce" #-}
* {- HLINT ignore "Eta reduce" -}
The last two
I don't have a really strong opinion, but... isn't this (attaching string-y
data to source constructs) pretty much exactly what GHC's annotation pragma
is for?
~d
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 3:14 PM Ben Gamari wrote:
> Vladislav Zavialov writes:
>
> > What about introducing -fno-warn-pragma=XXX?
Vladislav Zavialov writes:
> What about introducing -fno-warn-pragma=XXX? People who use HLint will
> add -fno-warn-pragma=HLINT to their build configuration.
>
A warning flag is an interesting way to deal with the issue. On the
other hand, it's not great from an ergonomic perspective; afterall,
I like the suggestion of a flag. For any realistic compilation you
have to pass a large number of flags to GHC anyway. `stack`, `cabal`
or so on can choose to pass the additional flag by default if they
wish or make it more ergonomic to do so.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:58 PM Jared Weakly wrote:
>
I rather agree.
We don't even need a convention do we? /Any/ comment in {- -} is ignored
by GHC /except/ {-# ... #-}. So tool users are free to pick whatever
convention they like to identify the stuff for their tool.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-devs On Behalf Of Ben Gamari
Hi everyone,
Recently Neil Mitchell opened a pull request [1] proposing a single-line
change: Adding `{-# HLINT ... #-}` to the list of pragmas ignored by the
lexer. I'm a bit skeptical of this idea. Afterall, adding cases to the
lexer for every tool that wants a pragma seems quite unsustainable.
