[GHC] #12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: mpickering | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Keywords: newcomer | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- The correct spelling is `INLINABLE`. It is confusing to read comments which refer to `INLINEABLE`. How to fix this: 1. `git grep INLINEABLE` 2. Open all the files and change to `INLINABLE`. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12613 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: mpickering | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Resolution: | Keywords: newcomer Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by nomeata): JFTR: It’s not only in comments; it is used as pragmas in many files: {{{ libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE foldM #-} libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE foldM_ #-} libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE replicateM #-} libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE replicateM_ #-} libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE unless #-} libraries/base/Control/Monad.hs:{-# INLINEABLE mfilter #-} libraries/base/Data/Bits.hs:{-# INLINEABLE toIntegralSized #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftA #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftA2 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftA3 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE when #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftM #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftM2 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftM3 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftM4 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE liftM5 #-} libraries/base/GHC/Base.hs:{-# INLINEABLE ap #-} libraries/base/GHC/List.hs:{-# INLINEABLE maximum #-} libraries/base/GHC/List.hs:{-# INLINEABLE minimum #-} libraries/base/GHC/Real.hs:{-# INLINEABLE even #-} libraries/base/GHC/Real.hs:{-# INLINEABLE odd #-} }}} Are all these pragmas broken? No: Both are accepted by the lexer: {{{ ("inlinable", strtoken (\s -> (ITinline_prag s Inlinable FunLike))), ("inlineable", strtoken (\s -> (ITinline_prag s Inlinable FunLike))), -- Spelling variant }}} -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12613#comment:1 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: mpickering | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: lowest | Milestone:
Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1
Resolution: | Keywords: newcomer
Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture:
| Unknown/Multiple
Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case:
Blocked By: | Blocking:
Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s):
Wiki Page: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Joachim Breitner
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: mpickering | Owner: Type: task | Status: closed Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: newcomer Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Changes (by nomeata): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12613#comment:3 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: mpickering | Owner: Type: task | Status: closed Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: newcomer Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by mpickering): Thanks Joachim. My next question, why is `INLINEABLE` even accepted at all. We don't accept misspellings of other pragmas, why is this different? -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12613#comment:4 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
#12613: Fix spelling of INLIN(E)ABLE in comments -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: mpickering | Owner: Type: task | Status: closed Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: newcomer Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by mpickering): FWIW, there are 996 spellings of INLINEABLE and 5773 spellings of INLINABLE on hackage. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12613#comment:5 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
participants (1)
-
GHC