Type Families in Haddock
david.waern at gmail.com
Wed Jul 2 13:47:42 EDT 2008
2008/7/2 Don Stewart <dons at galois.com>:
>> I'm going to add Type Families support to the Haddock HTML backend.
>> What would be the best way to do it? I'm thinking it could work
>> similar to how classes and instances are currently rendered, so that
>> type/data/newtype instances are collected and attached to type family
>> declarations. Is this too simplistic? Should we render
>> type/data/newtype instances as separate entities in the module
>> documentation instead (and perhaps do the same thing with class
>> Currently, when packages export instances that belong to classes from
>> other packages, those instances are not documented anywhere. An
>> advantage of having instances as separate entities in the exporting
>> module documentation is that no instances are "lost".
> Please go for it! I need type families support for the uvector
> documentation to build.
Yes, I didn't bother to add proper error messages for unsupported
syntax, so that's why some packages that use e.g. type families just
die with pattern matching failures. I'm adding support for more syntax
now, and I'll try to add proper error messages if I come across
something that won't be supported.
More information about the HaskellDoc