On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:51:12AM -0300, Isaac Dupree wrote:
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>> -ddump-parsed shows the program after parsing. All operator application
>> are parsed *left-associative* with one precedence. Then the renamer
>> re-associates them to respect precedence and associativit
Hi all,
This is just to let you know our plans for the first release of the
up-coming 6.8 branch (which will be called 6.8.1).
We are aiming to have a release candidate by the end of August, with all
the high priority bugs milestoned for 6.8 fixed:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?stat
Christian Maeder wrote:
Isaac Dupree wrote:
@@@ a b = ((a + b) : a) + b
Could -ddump-parsed not simply omit these (wrong) left-associative
parentheses? What information would be lost?
The information about how GHC's parser currently handles infixes. The
intent of the -ddump-xxx flags (I th
Isaac Dupree wrote:
> Is ghc -ddump-parsed supposed to give parse-syntactically valid Haskell?
> It nearly does - the only way I've seen it not do so is infix
> type-signatures and some infix definitions. Answer: no, look at what it
> does to the operators with fixities. But, -ddump-rn seems bett
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
-ddump-parsed shows the program after parsing. All operator application are
parsed *left-associative* with one precedence. Then the renamer re-associates
them to respect precedence and associativity.
So, no, -ddump-parsed will definitely not give syntactically valid
-ddump-parsed shows the program after parsing. All operator application are
parsed *left-associative* with one precedence. Then the renamer re-associates
them to respect precedence and associativity.
So, no, -ddump-parsed will definitely not give syntactically valid Haskell.
-ddump-rn probably
