You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Because I don't trust my typing, I ran pulp. I saw messages like this:
The import of module Control.Plus is redundant
Although "redundant" can have the meaning "unnecessary", I think the sense "characterized by unnecessary repetition" is more common. I certainly assumed that the message somehow meant that maybe Control.Plus was already imported by Prelude.
I think Elm's equivalent message is as accurate and less likely to mislead: Module List is unused.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
👍 Just to make sure we're all on the same page, do we all agree that the import of Data.Functor should continue to be described as 'redundant' in the following set of imports?
import Prelude
import Data.Functor (map)
paf31
changed the title
"The import of module Math is redundant" could be written more clearly.
"The import of module is redundant" should be "... is unused" in certain cases
Feb 17, 2017
@hdgarrood what would be even friendlier, in the case you bring up, would be an explanation as to why it is redundant... "Data.Functor is subsumed by imported Prelude" or something along those lines.
Suggest the word "redundant" in the above message be replaced with "unused".
As I newbie, I typed the following from the Purescript book:
Because I don't trust my typing, I ran
pulp
. I saw messages like this:Although "redundant" can have the meaning "unnecessary", I think the sense "characterized by unnecessary repetition" is more common. I certainly assumed that the message somehow meant that maybe
Control.Plus
was already imported byPrelude
.I think Elm's equivalent message is as accurate and less likely to mislead:
Module List is unused.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: