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
