On 31/01/2008, Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm going to try and get this integrated. I'm not happy yet with the > issue about blank lines vs '.' lines etc etc. I think that needs a wider > discussion but I don't want to hold up what we already have.
OK. Ian voted for '.' as empty line, so I went with that as it was the only comment, and was a positive one. What exactly are you not happy with? Is it the unsightliness of the periods in comments, or something else? As for a wider discussion, I'm all for it, but I believe the impact of this change on existing code should be negligible (pending further testing, of course), so I'm not sure if we're going to get much interest. I'm trying to solve the problem in a way that's useful for me now, and, I hope, in a way that's useful for others. I get the impression that I'm a pretty small minority in trying to generate Haddock docs from .lhs source. Alistair _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
