Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use lens-family-core instead of lens #238

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 29, 2018
Merged

Conversation

Gabriella439
Copy link
Collaborator

Related to commercialhaskell/stackage#3238

The immediate motivation of this change is to fix the upper bound issue
linked above. However, since we don't need the full lens dependency
this uses the much smaller and more stable lens-family-core library. Besides
reducing the footprint of the dhall executable this should hopefully also
reduce the number times we need to update the upper bound.

Related to commercialhaskell/stackage#3238

The immediate motivation of this change is to fix the upper bound issue
linked above.  However, since we don't need the full `lens` dependency
this uses the much smaller and more stable `lens-family-core` library.  Besides
reducing the footprint of the `dhall` executable this should hopefully also
reduce the number times we need to update the upper bound.
@PierreR
Copy link
Contributor

PierreR commented Jan 29, 2018

Is the hope to reduce footprint related to #240 given that trifecta has a dependency on lens contrary to megaparsec ?

@Gabriella439
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yeah, you're right that this would not significantly reduce the footprint unless this library also migrates off of trifecta. However, I think the better motivation is to reduce the number of times the upper bound is bumped

@Gabriella439 Gabriella439 merged commit 5fa4fae into master Jan 29, 2018
@Gabriella439 Gabriella439 deleted the gabriel/lens_family_core branch January 29, 2018 17:28
@PierreR
Copy link
Contributor

PierreR commented Jan 29, 2018

With the new caret cabal syntax this problem will hopefully fade away in a couple of years or so. Thanks for the reply.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants