Actually in team, one who writes `_` match, is very useful as that prevents breaking code when adding new value...

I can't really see any problem here. There is real world use case when member of team don't need to cover all cases therefore `_`.

On 01/31/2017 05:59 AM, Saurabh Nanda wrote:

I would want the compiler (or linter) to help me here. Think if a mid-to-large team where everyone may not know (or remember) what the current best practices are.

On 31 Jan 2017 9:51 am, "Michael Orlitzky" <michael@orlitzky.com> wrote:

On 01/30/2017 09:47 PM, Saurabh Nanda wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I have the following ADT
>
> data BookingState = Confirmed | Cancelled
>
> which had a very high chance of being expanded in the future to have more
> values. How do I ensure that every pattern match on BookingState matches
> each value explicitly. Basically prevent the '_' matcher ?
>

Don't write the "_" case? GHC will warn you about any pattern matches
you've missed.

_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.