Accept unknown future GHCs in the argument filtering code #8310
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
Mikolaj
added
re: ghc-options
Mikolaj
added
merge me
ulysses4ever
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2022
Kleidukos
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2022
Mikolaj
added
squash+merge me
|
mergify is not cooperating today |
|
oh, 2 days wait period! |
|
@mergify rebase |
☑️ Nothing to do
|
|
Hah, so first PR held off by the 2 day rule and immediately the delay is going to be overridden, because I need this for the release. Sorry @gbaz! |
|
@mergify backport 3.8 |
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2022
* Accept unknown future GHCs in the argument filtering code * Add changelog (cherry picked from commit 0f20c27)
✅ Backports have been created
|
mergify bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2022
Accept unknown future GHCs in the argument filtering code (backport #8310)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
A followup to #8260 (comment)
Not tested. Theoretically one could test locally by using GHC 9.4 and verifying in the cabal -v3 log that arguments are filtered in the same way as for GHC 9.2. One would need to find a cabal invocation in which the filtering is not vacuus. The test would fail without this change, but pass with this change.
Please include the following checklist in your PR:
Please also shortly describe how you tested your change. Bonus points for added tests!