tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768401356830813531.post3067513860784563859..comments2023-01-12T13:01:39.386-05:00Comments on Software Simply: Why version bounds cannot be inferred retroactively (using dates)mightybytehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15198998578494149797noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768401356830813531.post-53675403156961937142016-08-22T13:39:21.143-04:002016-08-22T13:39:21.143-04:00For more information check out the PVP FAQ.For more information check out <a href="http://pvp.haskell.org/faq/" rel="nofollow">the PVP FAQ</a>.mightybytehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15198998578494149797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768401356830813531.post-35621355109834902292016-08-22T13:32:40.492-04:002016-08-22T13:32:40.492-04:00As I mentioned in the post, a bound isn't ther...As I mentioned in the post, a bound isn't there to categorically prevent people from building your library against newer versions of dependencies. (The --allow-newer option for cabal-install lets you do just this.) It's there to document what versions you have tested against.mightybytehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15198998578494149797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768401356830813531.post-69193953323153671982016-08-22T13:12:19.112-04:002016-08-22T13:12:19.112-04:00I've never understood how you can set an upper...I've never understood how you can set an upper bound if you are developing using the newest versions of your dependencies.<br /><br />How can you know if the next version - which doesn't exist yet - of a dependency breaks your code?<br /><br />What if it doesn't, and the only thing keeping your code from building is an upper-bound set too tight, predicting the future erroneously?<br /><br />I don't understand why the Haskell community seem so keen on upper bounds on dependencies.<br /><br />(I don't understand much Haskell, mind you, so maybe I'm missing something obvious :-))Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com