Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2

2012-02-05 Thread Herbert Valerio Riedel
On Sun, 2012-02-05 at 04:41 +0100, Daniel Fischer wrote: > That may have been the idea, but doesn't make a difference. GHC allows a > shebang line as the first line of a file also in .hs files. ...except when enabling the CPP language extension, then you get a shebang.hs:1:0: error: invalid pre

Re: via-C

2012-02-05 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:09:58PM +0100, Krzysztof Skrz??tnicki wrote: > GHC code still depends on RTS code (written in C by the way) which has to > be ported to a specific platform first. Native code generator offers > 'registered' and 'unregistered' builds. The first are aware of specific > regi

Re: Oddity with 'cabal install' in GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Conal Elliott
Ah -- so use cabal-dev for development and cabal-install when a version stabilizes? -- Conal On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Jason Dagit wrote: > On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Conal Elliott wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Andres Löh > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Conal. > >> > >> > Th

Re: via-C

2012-02-05 Thread John Meacham
Being in C is very different than being 'portable'. The C code generated by GHC never looked anything like what you would expect C code to look like, it was basically a list of pre-proccessor macros that expanded to STG-machine code sort of. If you want to know what low-level operations ghc is doi

Re: via-C

2012-02-05 Thread Karel Gardas
Hello, as far as I understand, via-C was removed for registerised builds, but is still supported for unregisterised builds. So if you prefer via-C way, just compile GHC unregistered on your platform. Cheers, Karel On 02/ 5/12 07:48 PM, Serge D. Mechveliani wrote: Dear GHC team, I cannot u

Re: via-C

2012-02-05 Thread Krzysztof Skrzętnicki
GHC code still depends on RTS code (written in C by the way) which has to be ported to a specific platform first. Native code generator offers 'registered' and 'unregistered' builds. The first are aware of specific register layout of a architecture. You can find more rationale why it has been remov

Re: Haddock problems with GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Conal Elliott
Thanks, Philipp. Worked for me as well. For others with the same symptoms, here's the incantation I used: sudo cabal install --reinstall --force-reinstalls --enable-documentation > --global random-1.0.1.1 > And similarly for all of the other pre-installed packages. I reversed the order listed by

via-C

2012-02-05 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
Dear GHC team, I cannot understand why do you remove the C stage in GHC. To my mind: let the result be 3 times slower, but preserve the C code. Because it works everyhere, and there is no real need to rewrite the same program separately for all the existing processors (which number may become, for

Re: Oddity with 'cabal install' in GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Conal Elliott
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Andres Löh wrote: > Hi Conal. > > > Thanks for the reply! Note that I get this message even running 'cabal > > install' a second time after changing nothing. Is that scenario an > example > > of what you mean by a "potentially dangerous cabal invocation"? > > The c

Re: ghc -C in 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:11, Serge D. Mechveliani wrote: > I needed to look into the C code made by ghc-7.4.1 > GHC doesn't write C source any more. Warning: The -fvia-C flag does nothing; it will be removed in a future > GHC release > which is what this is telling you > ghc: panic!

ghc -C in 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
Dear GHC team, I needed to look into the C code made by ghc-7.4.1 (made from source by 7.0.1 on Debian Linux) for module TT (dropCWhile) where dropCWhile :: (Char -> Bool) -> [Char] -> [Char] dropCWhile p xs = case xs of []-> [] x: ys -> if p x then

Re: Haddock problems with GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread philipp siegmantel
I got the same warnings, reinstalling the packages with documentation enabled solved it for me. Philipp On 5 February 2012 00:17, Conal Elliott wrote: > Since installing GHC 7.4.1 (from sources), I'm getting lots of complaints > from 'ghc-pkg check', of the following form: > >> Warning: haddock-

Re: Oddity with 'cabal install' in GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Andres Löh
>> I've been >> unable to avoid this error message by any other means that (a) 'ghc-pkg >> unregister ' or (b) '--force-reinstall'. So far, '--solver=modular' >> hasn't helped. So I'm hoping for something less aggressive. In particular, >> in case nothing has changed, I want 'cabal install' to succ

Re: Oddity with 'cabal install' in GHC 7.4.1

2012-02-05 Thread Andres Löh
Hi Conal. > Thanks for the reply! Note that I get this message even running 'cabal > install' a second time after changing nothing. Is that scenario an example > of what you mean by a "potentially dangerous cabal invocation"? The check currently is entirely ad-hoc. Any reinstallation of an existi