Sebastian Graf <sgraf1...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi, > > I generally would like +0.1 steps, but mostly because it causes less > head-scratching to everyone new to Haskell. Basically the same argument as > Richard says. > > I can't comment on how far head.hackage (or any tool relies) on odd version > numbers, I certainly never have. Given that it's all overlays (over which > we have complete control), does it really matter anyway? When would we say > <=9.1 rather than <=9.2? Shouldn't 9.1 at one point become binary > compatible with 9.2, as if it really was "9.2.-1" (according to the PVP, > 9.2.0 is actually > 9.2, so that won't work)? I think there are multiple > ways in which we could avoid using 9.1 as the namespace for "somewhere > between 9.0 and 9.2 exclusively". We have alpha releases, so why don't we > name it 9.1.nightly? > One reason is that our versioning data model (as captured by Data.Version) now only admits numeric version components. Textual tags were previously admitted but deprecated in #2496 as there is no clear ordering for such versions.
>> majormajor.odd.time stamp > > TBH, I found the fact that the *configure* date (I think?) is embedded in > the version rather annoying. I sometimes have two checkouts configured at > different dates but branching off from the same base commit, so I'm pretty > sure that interface files are compatible. Yet when I try to run one > compiler on the package database of the other (because I might have copied > a compiler invocation from stdout that contained an absolute path), I get > an error due to the interface file version mismatch. I'd rather have a > crash or undefined behavior than a check based on the configure date, > especially since I'm just debugging anyway. I disagree here. Personally, if I do something non-sensical I would much rather get predictable version error than be sent off on a wild-goose chase debugging ghosts. Fixing an incorrect command-line takes a few seconds; finding a bizarre runtime crash due to subtly wrong ABI may take days. This is why I generally plop any test command-line of non-trivial length into a shell script; it makes safely switching between compilers much easier. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs