Oh, and I think that using sameTVar# for primop and sameTVar for wrapper is a good choice, even if we make transition slightly more difficult. This naming feels better to me and I think there are few libraries that will need to adjust. So I vote to keep these names as they are.
Janek
----- Oryginalna wiadomość -----
Od: "Jan Stolarek"
1. Why do you say "this naming feels more consistent"? Consistent with what? Convention is that functions ending with # operate on unboxed values and return unboxed values (usually), so to me it seemed consistent that sameTVar# returns an unboxed value, while sameTVar does not. I raised that problem on the Trac (http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/6135#comment:72) and the only answer I got was from Ian:
"Regarding the name of sameMutableArray#, I don't have a strong opinion. I suspect there are few users of the function, so personally I'd be inclined to use the most consistent names. " So I assumed that everyone else agrees. But anyway, this can be changed easily. We just need to agree on the names.
2. The module name PrimWrappers is terrible, because it's so close to PrimopWrappers Yes, I also don't like that similarity in names, but I don't think that current name is terrible - if I write sth like this:
import GHC.Prim import GHC.PrimWrappers it seems to be clearer whta the second module might contain, than if I write import GHC.Prim import GHC.BoolOpWrappers Again, I can change this, but we have to decide on a name. CmpOpWrappers is not good IMO - not all wrappers are for comparisons!
3. Could you add a section "Breaking changes" to http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/PrimBool to explain what to change. Yes, I was thinking about that yesterday when I realized that second person asks the question which was already answered on the wiki. I wasn't sure where to put information about breaking changes so that it is easy to find for people who need it. I think that I'll make a spearate page on the wiki and link to it from release notes.
Janek