Unify mkNV* and NV* patterns by bidirectional synonyms in value modules
#1046
Conversation
soulomoon
changed the title
mkNV* and NV* patterns by bidirectional synonyms in value modules
|
Thank you, I love these changes. |
|
Thank you too @Anton-Latukha for the help of reviewing the code. |
| * Introduction: | ||
| * `Nix.Value` | ||
| * [(link)](https://github.com/haskell-nix/hnix/pull/1046/files) Constraint `NVConstraint f = (Comonad f, Applicative f)` was introduced, in order to unify builder `mkNV*` and `NV*` patterns. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would note that Breaking & Additional - generally enough. If it is not major (breaking) change - everything else is additional niceties information. First - is first aid network, second is a daily news network.
For example, this change does not belong into "Introduction", it can be thought to belong to Additional, but as it changes type signatures in a number of places - it is a Breaking change. As it adds Comonad or Applicative (literal declaration of having requirement for such type class instance existence when there was none before - is a breakage) somewhere when it was not before.
The first most important client type of ChangeLogs in Haskell projects - is downstream developers. & generally under the semantic agenda of supporting the update, people look into changelogs. So the most important and clear thing ChangeLog should do - is to have as many breaking changes described precisely as possible. That it is an introduction of something into the code - can be said in explanation of breaking changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was originally put it into breaking, but it comes to me that it is jut short hands for Comonad f, Applicative f.
An introduction of short hand for the new constraint requirements, I think it is both introduction and breaking, sort of dangling in the middle.
Since you remind me of the change logs focus is on breaking changes and reading experience of developers , move back to breaking does seem to make more sense. Thanks, surely will modify it.
changes draft related to #1045