Re: Wanted: warning option for usages of unary minus

2007-05-01 Thread Isaac Dupree
Okay, first steps: 1. A Trac ticket (#1318, http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/1318) (is "feature request" a good category, versus "task"?) 2. A test-case to make sure I don't break anything with existing '-' syntax. I'm guessing it should go in testsuite/tests/ghc-regress/parser/should_ru

Re: Error compiling GHC/Num.lhs

2007-05-01 Thread Bas van Dijk
On 4/29/07, Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Bas, On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 11:54:35AM +, Bas van Dijk wrote: > > I'm trying to build GHC from darcs. Unfortunately compilation fails > with the following error: > > ... > cpphs: #error Please define LEFTMOST_BIT to be 2^(SIZEOF_HSWORD*8

Re: More speed please!

2007-05-01 Thread Josef Svenningsson
I'm replying to a rather old thread here, about unboxing in functions. Duncan had a continuation monad which passed around some data type that would be nice to unbox. You discussed strictness annotations in function types as a potential solution. I have a different tack on the problem which seems

RE: recent Windows installer for ghc head?

2007-05-01 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
Following the "snapshot distribution" link on GHC's download page yields this http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/current/dist/ghc-6.7.20070404-i386-unknown-mingw32.tar.bz2 That seems to be a tar bundle for Windows; it's not an msi but if you unpack it you should be able to run it ju

Re: ghc configure

2007-05-01 Thread Claus Reinke
Mainly this is due to modularity: many of the library packages can be built entirely separately from GHC, so their configure scripts are designed to be standalone. library packages are haskell packages, and much of the configuration data should be common (plus a few package-specific checks). wou

Re: ghc configure

2007-05-01 Thread C.M.Brown
Hi Simon, > Mainly this is due to modularity: many of the library packages can be built > entirely separately from GHC, so their configure scripts are designed to be > standalone. > Yes, I guess it would be a fair bit of work to have it check that you are building the whole of GHC as opposed to s

Re: ghc configure

2007-05-01 Thread Simon Marlow
C.M.Brown wrote: I've noticed that when you run ./configure on a ghc build lot's of repetition occurs. A lot of the time the same checks are being performed for each configure file in the ghc hierarchy. Could it be possible if some of these checks could be done once at a high level and then subs