Just a miscellaneous Haskell user, but that also sounds good to me.

I definitely support having a way to tell the compiler at the most specific level possible (per line, in this case) that the author is intentionally doing this and not to warn about it.

I wrote in scala for years and was always unhappy that for a very long time the designers refused to support [1] ( a scala version of Java's @SuppressWarnings annotation. The suggested hack for about a decade was to use a compiler plugin. 

Unrelated/on the importance of warning about the right things:

Thinking about this made me remember that C's switch fall-through-by-default behavior is so bad that you need to tell the compiler you actually want to do that. [2] [3]

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3506370/is-there-an-equivalent-to-suppresswarnings-in-scala

[2] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/code-quality/c26819?view=msvc-170

[3] https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/attributes/fallthrough

Hi David,

It seems to me that instead of working around this, we should add a pragma
to suppress the warning at the pattern site. Maybe something like

let
  {-# PARTIAL_MATCH #-}
  Just a = blah blah

That way GHC can see that you noticed the partial match and that you're
okay with it.

This sounds lovely to me!

--Kazu


_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.