{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreihooyhllyfh6qhzqbjtpixsa3cg5b4uts7lkijpikryajt5k3yc2q",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pi6woz4d47bkuws673w2il2r/app.bsky.feed.post/3mls2w5ykwwj2"
  },
  "path": "/t/is-it-okay-to-use-the-cabal-solver-to-conditionally-define-dependencies-and-instances-like-this/14103#post_2",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-14T05:09:30.000Z",
  "site": "https://discourse.haskell.org",
  "tags": [
    "The link to the thread"
  ],
  "textContent": "clinton:\n\n> Now arguably this is a little naughty as a flag is changing the external interface of the module (i.e. we’re exporting a new instance) but surely lots of automatic flags do this\n\nI don’t think changing the external interface of a module with flags is very common, actually. It’s not a good idea. But this is a bit of a contentious area; the policies and norms are underspecified.\n\nI was actually just looking at a discussion that showcases the disagreements. If we engage in some blame-free retrospective action (i.e., be nice to everybody in the thread), there are some generally-applicable observations made therein. The link to the thread.",
  "title": "Is it okay to use the cabal solver to conditionally define dependencies and instances like this?"
}