Add fake type signatures to Haddocks for run* functions
#375
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Haddock does not render the qualified module name in a type signature, so the `run*` functions render with confusing type signatures. We can't fix that, but we can take a leaf out of the `lens` package and provide clearer ones.
Contributor
|
Nice! I agree that this is clearer, thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Haddock does not render the qualified module name in a type signature, so the
run*functions render with confusing type signatures.We can't fix that, but we can take a leaf out of the
lenspackage and provide clearer ones.The haddocks for these functions confused me and several colleagues when we first encountered them.
Rendered:
