Open sellout opened 8 months ago
Ah, I see that this is a consequence of Pretty VersionRange
, and that set notation is just syntactic sugar in the parser, not maintained in the AST.
Thanks for the suggestion. I'd use it if the pretty printer spat it out as such. I don't think it's worth an option, though (cost of documenting, of users having to think about it).
Cabal 3.0 added set notation for version bounds, but cabal-plan-bounds doesn’t yet support it, and so removes it from existing bounds.
I feel like it’d be ideal to auto-detect whether
cabal-version >= 3.0
, but an explicit option to use set notation would be fine, too.It’s just much more readable for many-versioned bounds, IMO.