On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 04:34:30AM +0100, David Waern wrote:
> You are right, it's not the most modular solution. Nevertheless, we now
> have the ability to generate documentation from all kinds of GHC-specific
> source code - pretty cool.
> 
> Out of curiosity: Do you have a better solution for Haddock, if the
> requirement is to be able to understand GHC-specific code? Perhaps one
> could avoid having to modify the parser, and instead try to match
> Haddock-comments/declarations by their SrcLocs.
>
> Or perhaps your ideal solution would be something not involving GHC? :-)

No, I don't have a better idea.  I just have a bad feeling about the
current approach...

Stefan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc

Reply via email to