Thanks for the catch, Simon! I've filled out the field on a few tickets I
missed.
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> Austin
>
> thanks for adding the test. But don't forget to populate the "Test case"
> field of the ticket; I've done it for this one.
>
> Simon
>
> | -
| So why are Hoopl's rewrite functions specialized to UniqSM monad? My
| understanding so far was that this is precisely because we need access to
Uniq
| supply to generate new labels and registers during rewriting. I'm guessing
that
| nobody intended that these newly generated things will be
Herbert
My gut feel is that it's fragile and unexpected to have tickets change status
based on commit messages. Revisiting the ticket itself can remind you
that the fix is only partial, or
that there is another related ticket to look at, or
that you need to add a regression test, or
som
Hi,
Yeah i noticed the patch was smaller than i first thought, so i applied it
manually and fixed it where needed. The result is here (sorry not in a
repository, just did a quick fix without making it work on older GHC):
https://github.com/ghcjs/ghcjs.github.com/tree/master/packages/cabal-src/pri
Austin
thanks for adding the test. But don't forget to populate the "Test case" field
of the ticket; I've done it for this one.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-tickets [mailto:ghc-tickets-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of GHC
| Sent: 14 August 2013 07:44
| Cc: ghc-tick...@ha
Peter,
This should now be fixed in 94c35ddf31aef28de84661860f77a94229f60cb4. Your
nightlies should hopefully begin succeeding soon.
Thanks!
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Peter Simons wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have trouble building recent snapshots of the compiler, despite the
> fact that the
Hi Luite,
I applied my patches only to primitive package stored as a boot library in GHC
repositories. My
changes should probably be ported upstream to main repo of primitive package,
but I admit I don't
know what the workflow for this is.
If you desperately need latest version of primitive w
StandaloneDeriving always struck me as a really heavyweight way to write those
instances. EmptyDataDecls in many ways should have been in all along while
StandaloneDeriving is a rather peculiar ghc'ism.
I'm personally in favor of just making EmptyDataDecls "work better" here.
-Edward
On Aug 14
> Btw, if this is desired, we could make a
> commit add a ticket comment as soon as the respective ticket-number
> occurs (i.e. w/o any preceding verb).
I consider this useful. I want to write commit messages in the tesuite like
"Add regression test for #1234" instead of "Add regression test. See
Lesson learned (for me at least): add regression tests to the testsuite when
reporting compiler failures.
Janek
- Oryginalna wiadomość -
Od: "Kazu Yamamoto (山本和彦)"
Do: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Wysłane: środa, 14 sierpień 2013 7:39:10
Temat: Re: Segfault on x86 with -O2
Hi,
It seems to me
On 2013-08-13 at 14:20:59 +0200, Simon Marlow wrote:
[...]
> I have updated
> http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/WorkingConventions/Git to mention
> this, but it could probably do with more complete docs since the
> standard Trac docs don't take into account our local settings.
> Herbert, coul
11 matches
Mail list logo
