On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 12:40:18PM -0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > - The sources for a module A.B.C would be allowed to be placed > in either A.B.C.hs or A/B/C.hs relative to one of the directories > in the search path. Currently only A/B/C.hs is allowed. > > This is an easy change to make, and I believe Hugs already does > it this way.
I like this idea, especially if this is currently the way Hugs does it. It's great for smaller projects. > - We could provide the ability to specify a module prefix to associate > with a directory in the search path. For example, you could say > that the directory '.' is associated with the module prefix > "Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL" and avoid having to place your sources > in the directory Graphics/Rendering/OpenGL. > > I'm not sure what syntax we'd use for this. Henrik suggested > placing the module prefix in square brackets before the directory, > eg. > ghc -i '-i[Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL].' This seems a bit unpredictable to me; it means that you can have a whole bunch of unrelated modules sitting together in the same directory, and then confuse the user even more with obscure GHC commandline switches :). I'd argue that if you have a Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL module, you should make it 100% obvious that the module is in a Graphics.Rendering category; either putting it in a Graphics/Rendering directory or having a Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL.hs file makes this explicit. To put it another way -- is there a situation where you don't want to use either of the above two module naming schemes, and can justify having unrelated modules in an arbitrarily organised directory structure? -- #ozone/algorithm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - trust.in.love.to.save _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
