On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Duncan Coutts wrote: > By the way, if you have several common deps it's perfectly ok to factor > them out like this: > > Flag splitBase > Description: Choose the new smaller, split-up base package. > > Library > Build-Depends: network, HTTP, HTTP-Simple, MissingH, time>=1.1.1 > > if flag(splitBase) > Build-Depends: base >= 3, containers > else > Build-Depends: base < 3 > > > > In a future version of Cabal we might have this nicer syntax: > > Library > Build-Depends: base, network, HTTP ,HTTP-Simple, MissingH, time>=1.1.1 > > if package(base >= 3) > Build-Depends: containers
When Cabal development started I suggested to use Haskell code as configuration file, because there will be much extensions and the package description will not fit into a simple syntax soon. This suggestion was rejected because the Package description should be readable by an IDE. With the flags and package version comparison we move quickly to a Turing complete scripting language in form of a package description. :-) Btw. does the Setup.hs script still serves a purpose? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe