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

Fix haddocks on infix constructors #1118

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 11, 2024

Conversation

brandonchinn178
Copy link
Collaborator

@brandonchinn178 brandonchinn178 commented Jun 2, 2024

Resolves #758. Recommend reviewing commit-by-commit

@brandonchinn178 brandonchinn178 marked this pull request as ready for review June 2, 2024 07:20
Copy link
Member

@amesgen amesgen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

While the refactorings in the first three commits don't seem strictly necessary, they are nicely separated and make sense in the context of the additional where bindings introduced later.

Minor: I usually review changes that involve formatting with difftastic, so I would even be fine if you didn't separate out the formatting commits, but it certainly doesn't hurt; your efforts to increase reviewability are really appreciated!

src/Ormolu/Printer/Meat/Declaration/Data.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@brandonchinn178
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I always organize my commits anyway, because it's easier for me to reorganize and edit my own work 😃

@brandonchinn178 brandonchinn178 merged commit d90d5f6 into tweag:master Jun 11, 2024
9 checks passed
@brandonchinn178 brandonchinn178 deleted the bchinn-haddock-infix branch June 11, 2024 03:14
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AST differs on Haddock comment on infix constructor
2 participants