Hello Neil, Friday, December 09, 2005, 7:25:51 PM, you wrote:
>> values, and second even don't compiles because of problems in >> de-sugaring parallel comprehensions NM> Have you switched on Haskell 98 extensions? of course NM> Hopefully the new version of WinHugs will be significantly more user NM> friendly than even the old version of WinHugs, that has been my NM> experience using it. i will look at it >> 1) lack of preprocessor in WinHugs. i know that i can setup makefile >> to do this, but this is not convenient. preprocessor is absolutely >> needed for me to mask differences between GHC and Hugs NM> The Linux build and console versions of Hugs have these. Unfortunately NM> WinHugs does not :( I did write a version which roughly hacked in a NM> preprocessor, but then I went and modified my code so it didn't NM> require a preprocessor, and the changes were very hacky, so I never NM> took the time to get them submitted. Why are you using a preprocessor? NM> If you give me your situation, show its 100% essential, and its the NM> one thing holding you back that would probably motivate me enough to NM> get the changes in finally. GHC has a lot of features, which i need: hGetBuf/hPutBuf, Ctrl-Break handling, forkOS, getProgArgv, FastMutInt library, parallel arrays. so i want to isolate use of GHC-specific features in #ifdefs. also my program contains windows-specific and even x86-specific Haskell code (it is unaligned memory acces used to make things go faster). so my program have many conditional compilation and i think it is typical for any real-world multi-platform program. imho preprocessing will be useful not only for me, but for anyone who need to develop large program which eventually will be compiled by another Haskell implementation. as i already sayed, highest level of compatibility between ghc and hugs make such scenario (developing with hugs and compiling final version with ghc) perfectly possible. and counting the fact that hugs load programs 10 times faster than ghci, the choice is obvious and about implementing preprocessing: can't you just read from pipe "cpp src.hs" instead of reading from "src.hs"? or may be it will be more convenient to include preprocessing library directly in your sources? -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Hugs-Users mailing list Hugs-Users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users
