Fwd: Will there be a GHC 9.2.6?

Hi All I just noticed Haskell Language Server (HLS) 1.9 has been released, which supports GHC 9.2.5. My organisation is currently using GHC 9.2.2 and I don't see any immediate need to jump to GHC 9.4, it would be good to settle on the latest most stable version of the GHC 9.2 series as it

'Caching' of results of default instance definitions

Hi All My apologies if this is the wrong place to post questions about GHC internals from a non-GHC dev, I thought about using GHC Users but it seems quiet on that mailing list and I think my question relates closely to how GHC implements things, so I suspect only a dev could answer anyway. I

Re: Why can't arguments be levity polymorphic for inline functions?

Ben, The suggestion of erroring if the inline pragma was not there was just because I thought it would be better than silently doing something different. But that's just a subjective opinion, it's not core to what I'm proposing. Indeed there are two other options: 1. Make levity polymorphic

Re: Why can't arguments be levity polymorphic for inline functions?

t; this is really desireable. > > I don't think this has to mean we couldn't change how things work to > accomodate levity-polymorphic arguments. It just seems it's unclear what a > good design > would look like and if it's worth having. > > Cheers > Andreas > Am 08/10/2021 u

Why can't arguments be levity polymorphic for inline functions?

Hi All Not sure if this belongs in ghc-users or ghc-devs, but it seemed devy enough to put it here. Section 6.4.12.1 of the GHC user manual points out, if we allowed levity polymorphic arguments, then

Re: Options for targeting Windows XP?

ing to hack up an existing GHC to support 32 bit Windows XP, a battle I suspect will have to be refought every time a new GHC version is released given the current structure of GHC. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:34 PM Ben Gamari wrote: > Clinton Mead writes: > > > Thanks all for your re

Re: Options for targeting Windows XP?

Another gotcha that I didn't think of. The machines I'm targeting often have 32 bit versions of Windows, which it looks like isn't supported after GHC 8.6. Does this move it into the too hard basket? ___ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org

Re: Options for targeting Windows XP?

Thanks all for your replies. Just going through what Ben has said step by step: My sense is that if you don't need the threaded runtime system it would > probably be easiest to just try to make a modern GHC run on Windows XP. > Happy to run non-threaded runtime. A good chunk of these machines

Options for targeting Windows XP?

I'm currently trying to bring my company around to using a bit of Haskell. One issue is that a number of our clients are based in South East Asia and need software that runs on Windows XP. Unfortunately it seems the last version of GHC that produces executables that run on Windows XP is GHC 7.10.

Re: Container type classes

I'm not sure if this is related but the package Map-Classes provides about 50 functions on around a dozen key/value like datatypes e.g. Arrays, Maps, Sets (value is ()) etc. Even ByteStrings are included (Int

Re: MR does not merge

Hi All I'm not a GHC dev so my understanding of this process is limited to this thread but just my thoughts. My understanding is that we want to achieve the following two goals: 1. Never allow code which breaks tests to be committed to master. 2. Ensure that master is up to date as soon as