On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 10:15:39AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 12 September 2005 16:34, Frederik Eaton wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 12:41:32PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > >> On 20 August 2005 22:38, Frederik Eaton wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> It seems like it would be nice to have runghc not take modules from > >>> the current working directory in many cases since it breaks > >>> abstraction. It looks like it may be only a real problem for > >>> debugging, when modules are supposed to be in a package somewhere, > >>> but aren't, and the current directory happens to have files of the > >>> same name, but in those cases it can be quite a pain to track down > >>> the error. The problem comes up especially often when one writes > >>> scripts in haskell to work with haskell packages or generate > >>> haskell code. Do people frequently use the "find modules in the > >>> current directory" feature, or could they be asked to do that with > >>> > >>> {-# OPTIONS_GHC -i. #-} > >>> > >>> ? (I don't think this works yet) Otherwise maybe a special option > >>> could be added to tell runghc not to look in the current directory? > >>> > >>> Frederik > >> > >> runghc -i foo.hs? > > > > I'm talking about "#!" scripts, for which the interpreter is hidden > > from the user. I tried putting "#!/usr/bin/runghc -i" at the top of a > > script and it failed with "Failed to load interface for `Main'"... > > I'm assuming this is fixed with a newer version of runghc?
Yep, sorry. Frederik -- http://ofb.net/~frederik/ _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list Glasgow-haskell-bugs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs