Thank you for referencing the issue, I couldn't find it anymore
for some reason.
While the technicality of the "errors-as-values" proposal might
delay the implementation of such a taxonomy,
I think we could totally lay the groundwork and actually work on
defining it first.
As a side note, the idea of making a taxonomy of errors with unique tagging has been brought up on ghc-proposals recently, although marked as out-of-scope (maybe rightly so):The ease of searching is among the major motivations behind it.
--Best, Artem
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 5:07 PM Hécate <hecate@glitchbra.in> wrote:
On 15/06/2020 19:50, Ben Gamari wrote:
> Frankly, this makes me wonder whether we should change the output
> produced for loops. The current error is essentially un-Googleable, as
> we see here. I know I have personally struggled with this same issue in
> the past.
I wholeheartedly agree with this suggestion. Maybe we could even start a
little taxonomy of errors by adding an error code
to the message that would be more searchable? Something like E5032?
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs