Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

6.0.1 contains a breaking change on showRecordFields ? #303

Open
jmatsushita opened this issue Jan 17, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

6.0.1 contains a breaking change on showRecordFields ? #303

jmatsushita opened this issue Jan 17, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@jmatsushita
Copy link

PR #299 seems to contain a breaking change CC @ajnsit

For instance it breaks this code:

requiredFields :: Array String
requiredFields = Data.Show.showRecordFields requiredProxy (required record')

and returns this error:

[1/1 TypesDoNotUnify] .spago/option/main/src/Option.purs:440:22

  440      requiredFields = Data.Show.showRecordFields requiredProxy (required record')
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  Could not match type

    String

  with type

    Array String
@garyb
Copy link
Member

garyb commented Jan 17, 2023

You're absolutely right, I considered ShowRecordFields to be an internal typeclass since it's a helper for the standard Show instance, forgetting that it has to be exported also, making it essentially public.

I'm not sure what the best course of action is now - to revert this, or to just fix purescript-option since it hasn't been reported anywhere else. I have to assume purescript-option is not in the registry as otherwise this would have become apparent sooner. 🤔

@JordanMartinez
Copy link
Contributor

I think I agree that ShowRecordFields is an internal type class. I think purescript-option should have defined its own type class to handle its particular use case, but maybe they didn't because they would have just reimplemented ShowRecordFields... 🤔

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants