Chris Smith wrote:
> I got asked a question today about why Control.Applicative is labeled
> as "experimental" on Hackage. Perhaps that field is something of a
> failed experiment, and it remaining there is likely to confuse people.
>
> Just a thought... not sure of the best place to mention it.
On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:08 AM, Tom Murphy wrote:
On 6/7/11, James Cook wrote:
[...]
The name of the field could be better, though. On first exposure,
people tend to think "stability: experimental" or "stability:
unstable" means the package is likely to crash (For those who don't
know, it means
On 6/7/11, James Cook wrote:
[...]
>
> The name of the field could be better, though. On first exposure,
> people tend to think "stability: experimental" or "stability:
> unstable" means the package is likely to crash (For those who don't
> know, it means the API is likely to change in future rel
I like the goal of the stability field, but I don't know how to use it.
Is it intended to track a package's overall maturity ? Eg:
experimental - alpha - beta - almost ready - stable - mature - obsolete
Or, since many packages have multiple major and minor releases, to track the
current release
On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Christopher Done wrote:
On 7 June 2011 15:05, James Cook wrote:
It's good, in my opinion, to be able to state succinctly in a
standardized way that, although it does something now, what the code
does and how it does it are probably going to change in the future.
On 7 June 2011 15:05, James Cook wrote:
> It's good, in my opinion, to be able to state succinctly in a standardized
> way that, although it does something now, what the code does and how it does
> it are probably going to change in the future.
>
I think no one really updates this field and it's
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:05 PM, James Cook wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2011, at 10:57 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
>
>> I got asked a question today about why Control.Applicative is labeled as
>> "experimental" on Hackage. Perhaps that field is something of a failed
>> experiment, and it remaining there is like
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Tillmann Rendel
wrote:
> On
> http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/base/latest/doc/html/Control-Applicative.html,
> in the upper right corner, the module is marked as "experimental". I think
> this is a Haddock feature, not a Hackage feature.
Oddly, I couldn
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Tillmann Rendel wrote:
Hi,
James Cook wrote:
As far as Control.Applicative, I'm not sure to what package you're
referring. That label doesn't apply to modules, it applies to
packages,
and Control.Applicative is a part of the "base" package (which is not
labeled e
Hi,
James Cook wrote:
As far as Control.Applicative, I'm not sure to what package you're
referring. That label doesn't apply to modules, it applies to packages,
and Control.Applicative is a part of the "base" package (which is not
labeled experimental).
On
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/
On Jun 6, 2011, at 10:57 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
I got asked a question today about why Control.Applicative is
labeled as
"experimental" on Hackage. Perhaps that field is something of a
failed
experiment, and it remaining there is likely to confuse people.
Just a thought... not sure of the
I got asked a question today about why Control.Applicative is labeled as
"experimental" on Hackage. Perhaps that field is something of a failed
experiment, and it remaining there is likely to confuse people.
Just a thought... not sure of the best place to mention it.
--
Chris Smith
__
12 matches
Mail list logo
