Seems reasonable and useful to me. Is this a good use of the process here? https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals

On Sep 7, 2016, at 10:39 AM, David Feuer wrote:

Currently, the only way to suppress custom warnings and deprecations is with -fno-warn-warnings-deprecations, which is a rather large hammer. I see two ways we can improve this, and I propose that we should do both.

1. Per-binding suppression

Add -fno-warn-binding, -fno-deprecate-binding, -fwarn-binding options, and -fdeprecate-binding options. These would take the (optionally qualified) name of a binding and control warnings tied to it. So if you invoked -fno-warn-binding "sillyFunction", then GHC would not warn you about the silliness of anything named sillyFunction. -fno-warn-binding "Data.Silly.sillyFunction" would limit the suppression to the silly function in Data.Silly. -fno-deprecate-binding would refrain from emitting deprecation warnings for the binding in question. -fno-deprecate-binding would presumably imply no-warn-binding, since someone who doesn't care that a function is going to be removed probably also doesn't care what else is wrong with it.

2. Named warning classes

I'd like to add an optional "warning class" to the WARNING pragma, preceding the warning description. This would be a short string indicating what sort of warning is involved. This would be totally free-form, but the documentation would suggest a few conventional options such as "partial" and "slow". Then whole warning classes could be controlled with -fno-warn-class and -first-class.

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Interesting ideas! What if #1 was implemented as a new declaration type that is allowed in where clauses? f x = SomeConstant where { unused x } For #2, I would love to have a general system for declaring new types of warnings that come with a way to dispatch the specific warning. So, picking some random new names for these: {-# NEW_VALUE_WARNING partial "This function is partial, and so should be used with care" #-} {-# VALUE_WARNING partial unsafePerformIO #-} -- Additional detail text is optional!! Lots of potential for bike shedding, a variety of choices in the tradeoff between complexity and boilerplate. On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 7:39 AM, David Feuer wrote:

Currently, the only way to suppress custom warnings and deprecations is with -fno-warn-warnings-deprecations, which is a rather large hammer. I see two ways we can improve this, and I propose that we should do both.

1. Per-binding suppression

Add -fno-warn-binding, -fno-deprecate-binding, -fwarn-binding options, and -fdeprecate-binding options. These would take the (optionally qualified) name of a binding and control warnings tied to it. So if you invoked -fno-warn-binding "sillyFunction", then GHC would not warn you about the silliness of anything named sillyFunction. -fno-warn-binding "Data.Silly.sillyFunction" would limit the suppression to the silly function in Data.Silly. -fno-deprecate-binding would refrain from emitting deprecation warnings for the binding in question. -fno-deprecate-binding would presumably imply no-warn-binding, since someone who doesn't care that a function is going to be removed probably also doesn't care what else is wrong with it.

2. Named warning classes

I'd like to add an optional "warning class" to the WARNING pragma, preceding the warning description. This would be a short string indicating what sort of warning is involved. This would be totally free-form, but the documentation would suggest a few conventional options such as "partial" and "slow". Then whole warning classes could be controlled with -fno-warn-class and -first-class.

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs