-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 426
Description
Both plugins are tiny and neither require a lot of work to upgrade to newer GHC versions.
In theory, HLS plugins are supposed to be "cheap" but they still incur some maintenance burden.
So combining them into one sounds very tempting.
Further, @VeryMilkyJoe is currently working on an automatic rename feature, where your imports in Haskell modules get renamed when a Haskell file is renamed.
This feature has considerable overlap with both plugins, semantically part of hls-rename-plugin, practically needs code from hls-module-name-plugin for guessing the new module path.
Thus, there would be two beneficial reasons to fold the hls-module-name-plugin into the hls-rename-plugin.
The only reason we might want to keep them separate is when one of the plugins is considerably harder to upgrade to new GHC versions. However, the rename plugin uses hiedb primarily, and the module name plugin uses very few features of the GHC API. So, this risk seems very small and I think is worth the benefits.
Any opinions on this?