I can't answer your question before I will port inline-r to the newer vector. I would prefer to support both version and keep CPP around, like you suggested, but the answer depends on the amount of changes I need to keep. If that would be few lines of code then I'll go with that, in the side if the amount of changes will be comparable with a module size, then I'd prefer to cut out older versions.
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019, 18:04 Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com wrote: > Would it be easier if you can do a conjunction on vector and base version > in your cpp should you want to support both sides ? > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:59 AM Alexander V Vershilov < > alexander.vershi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> For inline-r we have added a revision that sets upper limit, so now >> hackage and stackage should both be happy. I'm not sure if any Linux >> distribution provides inline-r as a package but that should be normal >> situation for them. Next version will either set lower dependency boundary >> or will keep a code that will run with both APIs. So from my perspective >> any solution (even keeping things as-is) will be ok. >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019, 17:31 Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Hrmmm. Here’s what I’ll do: I’ll make the same release a minor version >>> bump and make the bug fix bump version unbuildable. >>> >>> Would this help matters ? >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:23 AM Carter Schonwald < >>> carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Yeah, I later found it impacted one of my own pieces of code too, in >>>> that I needed to make still further type families injective. >>>> >>>> I do think that a lot of vectors current module structure reflects a >>>> desire for injectivity coupled with historical a lack of mechanism for >>>> guaranteeing it. >>>> >>>> Mess up on my part for sure. :) >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 8:11 AM Boespflug, Mathieu <m...@tweag.io> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Carter, >>>>> >>>>> thanks for looking into this. We were initially surprised to see a >>>>> breaking change in a point release, but no biggy. It's pretty hard to >>>>> offer >>>>> strong stability guarantees without automated tooling to catch this kind >>>>> of >>>>> thing, and these things happen. We'll patch up HaskellR shortly. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 at 01:06, Carter Schonwald < >>>>> carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> To be clear : I’m annoyed with myself that this impacted a package >>>>>> that depends on vector, but this does seem to be the case that the newest >>>>>> bug fix release for vector actually revealed a broken design for the >>>>>> vector >>>>>> instances / data types in the inline-r package. >>>>>> >>>>>> To;dr — I suggest patching inline-r to remove the s parameter in its >>>>>> immutable vector data types >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Carter Schonwald < >>>>>> carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> so i took a look .. (also the inline-r devs seem to have done a >>>>>>> hackage revision so you wont hit that issue in your current setup if >>>>>>> you do >>>>>>> a cabal update ..) >>>>>>> and it seems like the type definitions in inline-r are kinda bogus >>>>>>> and you should get them patched ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the MVector type class, and related type families, all assume your >>>>>>> mutable type has the last two arguments as the io/state token and then >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> element type >>>>>>> >>>>>>> eg >>>>>>> basicLength :: v s a -> Int >>>>>>> <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/Data-Int.html#t:Int> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i looked at >>>>>>> https://github.com/tweag/HaskellR/blob/1292c8a9562764d34ee4504b54d93248eb7346fe/inline-r/src/Data/Vector/SEXP.hs#L346-L374 >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> as a point of grounding this chat >>>>>>> the injective type familly in question is defined by the follwoing >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --#if MIN_VERSION_base(4,9,0)type family Mutable >>>>>>> <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.2/docs/src/Data.Vector.Generic.Base.html#Mutable> >>>>>>> (v >>>>>>> <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.2/docs/src/Data.Vector.Generic.Base.html#local-6989586621679032525> >>>>>>> :: * -> *) = (mv >>>>>>> <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.2/docs/src/Data.Vector.Generic.Base.html#local-6989586621679032526> >>>>>>> :: * -> * -> *) | mv -> v#elsetype family Mutable (v :: * -> *) :: * >>>>>>> -> * -> *#endif >>>>>>> >>>>>>> anyways, it looks like the Pure / immutable vector data type in >>>>>>> inline-r has a spurious state token argument in its definition that >>>>>>> shouldn't be there, OR there need to be two "s" params in inline-r >>>>>>> instead >>>>>>> of the one >>>>>>> >>>>>>> heres the full code i linked to in question >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- | Mutable R vector. Represented in memory with the same header >>>>>>> as 'SEXP' >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- nodes. The second type parameter is phantom, reflecting at the >>>>>>> type level the >>>>>>> -- tag of the vector when viewed as a 'SEXP'. The tag of the vector >>>>>>> and the >>>>>>> -- representation type are related via 'ElemRep'. >>>>>>> data MVector s ty a = MVector >>>>>>> { mvectorBase :: {-# UNPACK #-} !(SEXP s ty) >>>>>>> , mvectorOffset :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Int32 >>>>>>> , mvectorLength :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Int32 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> -- | Internal wrapper type for reflection. First type parameter is >>>>>>> the reified >>>>>>> -- type to reflect. >>>>>>> newtype W t ty s a = W { unW :: MVector s ty a } >>>>>>> instance (Reifies t (AcquireIO s), VECTOR s ty a) => G.MVector (W t >>>>>>> ty) a where >>>>>>> >>>>>>> data Vector s (ty :: SEXPTYPE) a = Vector >>>>>>> { vectorBase :: {-# UNPACK #-} !(ForeignSEXP ty) , vectorOffset >>>>>>> :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Int32 , vectorLength :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Int32 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> type instance G.Mutable (W t ty s) = Mutable.W t ty >>>>>>> Anyways, the fix here is to remove the s param from the Pure version >>>>>>> of W and "Sexp Vector" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 6:16 PM Carter Schonwald < >>>>>>> carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> were you using the same version of vector in both setups? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> in the most recent vector release we made mutable type family >>>>>>>> injective in the vector package for ghc's that support it ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 1:50 PM Dominick Samperi < >>>>>>>> djsamp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When I use v8.6.3 of GHC under Ubuntu to install the inline-r >>>>>>>>> package >>>>>>>>> I get the error "Type family equation violates injectivity >>>>>>>>> annotation," and >>>>>>>>> a type variable on the LHS cannot be inferred from the RHS, due to >>>>>>>>> the lack of injectivity (I suppose). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On the other hand, v8.0.2 of GHC (shipped with Haskell Platform >>>>>>>>> under >>>>>>>>> Ubuntu) does not have this problem (it has other problems). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Has something changed in the latest version of the compiler that >>>>>>>>> might >>>>>>>>> cause this? Possible work-around? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> FYI, the line that triggers the error is: >>>>>>>>> type instance G.Mutable (W t ty s) = Mutable.W t ty >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The variable that cannot be inferred is 's'. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Dominick >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> ghc-devs mailing list >>>>>>>>> ghc-devs@haskell.org >>>>>>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> ghc-devs mailing list >>>>>> ghc-devs@haskell.org >>>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> ghc-devs mailing list >>> ghc-devs@haskell.org >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >>> >>
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
