Re: bit rotting of Haddock

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 02:38:11PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 21/09/2012 11:46, Simon Hengel wrote:
> >TL;DR We have a regression in Haddock.  It does not hyperlink ()
> >anymore.  Any idea what could have introduced that?
> >
> >On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 02:38:11PM +0200, David Waern wrote:
> >>2012/8/28 Simon Hengel <[email protected]>:
> >>>I guess (c) was an intended change, right?  What commit introduced that?
> >>
> >>No idea about this one.
> >
> >By now I think this is a bug.  I opened a ticket [1].
> >
> >Without code bisection, I can't tell which commit introduced this
> >regression.  So I guess our best bet is educated guessing.
> 
> The alternative to bisecting is to do it the old fashioned way:
> debug the problem.  I personally have no idea why () should not be
> hyperlinked any more, but I bet a few judiscious traces in the right
> place will give us some clues.

I'll give it a try as soon as I can free up some time for it.

Cheers,
Simon