On Thursday 15 March 2007 21:34, Ian Lynagh wrote: > hsc2hs gives different output on different platforms, so anyone building > from source needs it, not just those building from darcs.
I came to the same conclusion this morning while standing under the shower... :-) So things are quite different for hsc2hs than for alex and happy. In the latter case we can require these tools for bleeding edge developers and include pre-generated files in the released source distributions. > Regardless, it would be good to merge whatever differences there are > between ghc's hsc2hs and the standalone one and then have ghc grab the > canonical hsc2hs with darcs-all. That's exactly my plan. > If you meant hsc2hs should be a dependency even for people building from > a tarball, then that is Simon's call. No, that would be bad. I think that the GHC project (and Hugs/nhc) should grab the canonical hsc2hs and use it for its build process, ignoring any other hsc2hs, even if it's already there. (Would there really be a noticeable benefit autodetecting an already installed hsc2hs and use that instead?) But: We *do not* install hsc2hs anymore, and make it a standalone project distributed separately. Same for cpphs. I think this disentangling of tools and compilers/interpreters makes sense, and the update-alternatives technology is only needed for 'runhaskell'. Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
