Am Montag, 22. März 2004 12:46 schrieben Sie: > > Am Sonntag, 21. März 2004 12:36 schrieben Sie: > > > Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: > > > > [...] My question is, if a module is considered non-portable only if > > > > it contains non-portable constructs itself, or if a module is also > > > > non-portable if it just imports a module which is non-portable. > > > > > > Both, otherwise stating the property "portable" wouldn't help very > > > much. > > > > Well, I discovered that ghci is able to load modules without the > > -fglasgow-exts option even if they rely on non-portable modules from the > > hierarchical libraries (like, e.g., Control.Monad.Reader). > > Ultimately, *every* module depends on non-portable modules - somewhere > it all has to come down to primitives, and these are wired into each > compiler in some magic way.
But then Sven Panne's comment would mean that every module has to be documented as non-portable. > --KW 8-) Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell