Hi, Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 14:40 -0500 schrieb Jeremy Shaw: > I dislike epochs, since we can never get rid of them. I do agree here. > Last time I checked, the migration was somewhat involved. The types > and constructors have an additional argument, so pretty much every > type signature needs to be updated, and other functions need extra > arguments. I’m not the most experienced Haskell programmer, but that does not sound too involved to me. It sounds rather like a case of: For each additional argument (type or function), I obviously don’t need it, because my code works, so find out the proper default, add it, and when the code compiles again I’m done. It might be tedious (for all the type sigs), but not involved in the sense that it requires big, non-local code changes. I’d really like to hear from someone who is using HaXml in his code and has done the migration, or at least understood the implications, to tell us how hard it is. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil