... | ... | @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ Trying to pull out the AST from GHC raises these sorts of questions, because we |
|
|
In many cases however, they still require `GhcPass` because something transitively calls something that needs to case on the stage.
|
|
|
We might be tempted to refactor those to live in the `Language.Haskell.Syntax` modules, but it will make the types more complex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is @Ericson2314 view not to worry about generalizing things now.
|
|
|
It is @Ericson2314's view not to worry about generalizing things now.
|
|
|
If it's GHC specific, just keep it that way, and instead focus on modularity.
|
|
|
This is because modularity leads to multiple downstream consumers, and balancing the needs of multiple actually existing downstream consumers---not anticipating the needs of multiple hypothetical consumers---is what make libraries great.
|
|
|
So if we have an AST package, and if GHC and other things that use it start duplicating functionality, then let's worry about the quality of our abstractions, but not before.
|
... | ... | |