I think the underlying problem here is that there is a difference between "literate" comments and "normal" comments.
In a bird-style literate Haskell file, this is what I'll call a literate comment: ~~~ A line with no marker at the beginning ~~~ A normal comment is in a line of Haskell code, put with a comment indicator: ~~~ > -- This is a "normal" comment ~~~ When GHC sees a bird-style literate Haskell file, it first strips out all lines that don't begin with >. Then, it starts doing its real work, including parsing Haddock comments. So, to use a Haddock comment in a literate Haskell file, you'd need to use the "normal" comment style: ~~~ > -- | Make a numbered widget > mkWidget :: Int -> Widget ~~~ There is no way to use Haddock markup in a "literate" comment. But, as Mateusz points out, there may be blank lines between the Haddock comment and the thing being described: ~~~ > -- | Get the number of a widget > > widgetNum :: Widget -> Int ~~~ I hope this clarifies things! Richard On Jan 14, 2015, at 2:42 AM, sidhu1f <[email protected]> wrote: > At Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:31:54 +0530, > Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote: > >> I imagine you're suggesting that something like > >> Literate comment >>> someCode = undefined > > This (literate comment followed by code with no intervening blank > line) is exactly what I want (regret my explanation was unclear). But > when I try it, GHC reports the error 'unlit: Program line next to > comment'. > >> is allowed ... > > As you mention above behaviour is allowed, could you let me know how > to enable it? > > Regards > Sidhu > _______________________________________________ > Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
