Maybe a secondary git branch would be good to implement it. Em 31/08/2014 00:32, "Daniel Peebles" <pumpkin...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Hi all, > > I've had a sudden urge to do some Haskell archeology and that led me > to a question about how we feel "philosophically" about keeping > abandoned projects and old versions of live projects in nixpkgs. I > think it could be valuable to preserve important pieces of Haskell > history (and perhaps other projects) and it seems like nix is uniquely > positioned to be able to do that well. I don't propose keeping all > versions of all the compilers around, but I'd like to pick out key > points in history and preserve them. > > In particular, I was thinking of attempting to get the following working: > - HBC: perhaps the original Haskell compiler. I'd probably aim for a > version that implements Haskell 1.4 and one before that standard was > even proposed. Polymorphic map and (++) in Prelude! > - NHC: can build it with HBC > - GHC: the latest version that supports linear implicit parameters, > because they're gone now and I think people should be able to tinker > with them > > The nice thing about doing this sort of thing with compilers is that > they tend to not have many dependencies, but I expect I might also > need to package up an old version of yacc for HBC. If it starts > getting too messy I might abandon the project, but I think it could > work fairly nicely. This would also pave the way to exploring other > interesting abandoned projects like fudgets and such. > > How do people feel about this? Is it something I should maintain > independently of nixpkgs or does it belong in the main repo? > > Thanks, > Dan > _______________________________________________ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev