On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:20:25PM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
> Okay, I believe I have come up with a modified version that accepts many more
> programs and doesn't require complicated comma handling, you can make all
> decisions based on the top of the context stack. It also allows many useful
> l
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 03:11:16PM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
>
> ah cool, can you point me to which file it is implemented in in the source
> so I can copy your new rules?
It's lexTokenAlr and friends in compiler/parser/Lexer.x
It's a while since I looked at it, but IIRC it's not as clean to re
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:32:31PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 13/05/14 15:04, John Meacham wrote:
> >Hi, I noticed that ghc now supports an 'AlternateLayoutRule' but am
> >having trouble finding information about it. Is it based on my
> >proposal and sample implementation?
> >http://www.mail-a
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 12:46:05PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> happy with buildbot, it might not be the worst choice.
For reference, the reason we moved away from buildbot is that it needs
to maintain a TCP connection for the duration of the build. With some
builds taking many hours (eithe
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 04:50:40PM -0400, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> huh you're right!
>
> I seem to recall that that snapshots hadn't been updated since december
> while they were still up though...
Yes, uploading new snapshots is waiting for me to find some time to
implement a way to upload with
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 06:48:12AM -0400, Dubiousjim wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:18:52PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 11:12:38PM -0400, Dubiousjim wrote:
> > > target$ inplace/bin/ghc-stage2 -o hello-cross hello.hs
> > >
=
The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 7.6.3
=
The GHC Team is pleased to announce a new patchlevel release of GHC, 7.6.3.
This is a bugfix release r
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:21:26PM -0400, Ben Gamari wrote:
>
> what is the plan for
> 7.8? Will it admit API breakage? Should we establish a timeframe for getting
> work in before a formal release candidate is cut?
7.8 will be released as shortly after ICFP as we can. It will allow API
changes.
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 11:12:38PM -0400, Dubiousjim wrote:
> target$ inplace/bin/ghc-stage2 -o hello-cross hello.hs
> [1 of 1] Compiling Main ( hello.hs, hello.o )
> Linking hello-cross ...
> target$ ./hello-cross
> Can't modify application's text section; use the G
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 10:19:14AM +0200, kudah wrote:
> Does ghc still build under cygwin
Sorry, no; we only support targetting mingw, not cygwin.
> Also, is it possible yet to build a ghc cross-compiler targeting
> windows?
I don't think anyone's tried.
Thanks
Ian
_
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:21:25AM +0800, John Lato wrote:
>
> What would be ideal would be if this "library API freeze" coincided with
> the snapshot (odd-numbered) release.
I was only thinking of about a 2 week period, and only on the stable
branch. Freezing the library APIs in HEAD after a sna
Hi David,
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 09:39:40PM -0800, David Terei wrote:
>
> This bug is still present in mainline. Any chance of it being fixed?
I've just built HEAD with 7.6.2, so I think this has been fixed. If not,
please give me more details on how to reproduce it.
Thanks
Ian
___
We've had long discussions about snapshot releases, and the tricky part
is that while we would like people to be able to try out new GHC
features, we don't want to add to the burden of library maintainers by
requiring them to update their libraries to work with a new GHC release
more than once a y
Hi all,
Thank you to everyone who gave us feedback on when we should release
7.8.1, and on future release plans in general. We've looked at all the
responses, and we think that the best plan is to continue to make major
releases annually, with minor "patch-level" releases between them.
Additiona
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:58:28PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Both have issues: Putting it in file-io will cause everyone to depend on
> file-io
If it ended up there, then we'd presumably encourage people to use
NoImplicitPrelude and import e.g. list functions from Data.List rather
than P
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 09:47:21AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> This is especially true when the shim packages are less simple to use,
> due to the handling of Prelude.
Just to make sure I am following you, I think you are saying:
Everything would work fine if there was a Prelude in base (
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:54:35PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 25/02/13 18:05, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >
> >Personally, I don't think the language report should be specifying the
> >content of libraries at all,
>
> It's not that straightforward, because th
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 06:38:46PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> Ian Lynagh writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > If we did that then every package would depend on haskell2010, which
> > is fine until haskell2013 comes along and they all need to be changed
> > (or mis
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:29:42AM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:31:56PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> >>In any case there is still the problem: What and where is the Prelude...
> >>bu
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:31:56PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Hopefully the problem here (often-changing base) is big enough and the
> alternative (more purpose-oriented and more stable) packages are
> attractive enough to make people use the new set.
I'm pretty confident that most packag
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:25:03PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | I added a Goals section to
> | http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/SplitBase
>
> Thanks. But the first goal, which is the dominant one, is very unclear to me
> as my comments mentioned. A description of what the proble
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:38:04AM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> Glad to see you're making progress on this. Once we're done exploring how
> fine-grained we can make the division we might want to pull back a bit
I definitely agree with "Once we're done". Once we have made all the
splits we might
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 07:52:00PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Of course with too much splitting one runs in the Bane of the Orphaned
> Instances – neither should base-foreign require base-float nor the other
> way around, but "Storable Double" needs to be define somewhere...
This is no di
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 02:45:19PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> Remember that fingerprinting is not hashing. For fingerprinting we
> need to have a realistic expectation of no collisions. I don't
> think FNV is suitable.
>
> I'm sure it would be possible to replace the C md5 code with some
>
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 03:48:51PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Yesterday, I experimented a bit with base’s code, first beginning with
> as few modules as possible and adding what’s required; then starting
> with the whole thing and trying to remove e.g. IO.
>
> But clearly it is not easy:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:32:06PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> I have started a wikipage with the list of all modules from base, for a
> first round of shuffling, grouping and brainstorming:
>
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/SplitBase
Great, thanks for taking the lead on this!
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 06:28:22PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 13.02.2013, 13:58 + schrieb Ian Lynagh:
> > If we go this route, then we would probably want to end up without a
> > package called 'base', and then to make a new package ca
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 09:00:15AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> I believe Ian has done some experiments with splitting base further,
> so he might have more to add here.
There are some sensible chunks that can be pulled out, e.g. Foreign.*
can be pulled out into a separate package fairly easily
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 06:35:25PM +0800, Magicloud Magiclouds wrote:
>
> Linuxmint Nadia, ghc-7.6.1 was built and running OK.
> Just downloaded ghc-7.6.2, without changing anything and environment, and
> boot and configure returned OK, I got these. What happened?
>
> "/usr/local/bin/ghc" -H32
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:09:56AM +0800, John Lato wrote:
>
> What I would like to see are more patch-level bugfix releases. I suspect
> the reason we don't have more is that making a release is a lot of work.
> So, Ian, what needs to happen to make more frequent patch releases
> feasible?
Wel
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:30:23PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | > You may ask what use is a GHC release that doesn't cause a wave of
> updates?
> | And hence that doesn't work with at least some libraries. Well, it's a
> very useful
> | forcing function to get new features actually ou
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:02:18PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>
> You may ask what use is a GHC release that doesn't cause a wave of updates?
> And hence that doesn't work with at least some libraries. Well, it's a very
> useful forcing function to get new features actually out and teste
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 12:06:12PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> As a straw man, let's suppose we want to do annual API releases in
> September, with intermediate non-API releases in February.
That's a non-API release 5 months after the API release.
6.10.2 was 5 months after 6.10.1 (.3 was 1
-yearly (e.g. every 18 months) if that makes
life easier for distros, library maintainers, the HP, etc. But I
wouldn't advocate it either; from GHC's point of view, historically
we've always had enough new stuff to justify a new major release after a
year.
Thanks
Ian
-
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 09:42:39AM -0800, Mark Lentczner wrote:
>
> I wish GHC would radically change it's release process. Things like 7.8
> shouldn't be release as "7.8". That sounds major and stable. The web site
> will have 7.8 at the top. The warning to use the platform will fall flat
> becau
I'm not too optimistic we could actually get the final release out
during February, assuming we want to allow a couple of weeks for people
to test an RC.
Does the Haskell Platform actually want to commit to using a GHC release
with "tons of [new] stuff", that has had little testing, days or weeks
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 01:05:05PM -0700, Caitlin wrote:
>
> I deleted the Haskell Platform installation, manually removed all traces of
> GHC and the Hakell Platform from my registry and various folders, then
> re-installed the Haskell Platform. I created a folder under the 'C:\'
> drive, copied
=
The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 7.6.2
=
The GHC Team is pleased to announce a new patchlevel release of GHC, 7.6.2.
This release fixes a numbe
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 09:03:38PM +0200, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
> * Simon Peyton-Jones [2013-01-14 18:09:50+]
> > Friends
> >
> > I'd like to propose a way to "promote" newtypes over their enclosing type.
> > Here's the writeup
> > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Newtype
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 03:28:15PM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Evan Laforge wrote:
> > I assume it would change from "doesn't compile" to "works" if you add
> > the required import. It's the same as the FFI thing, right? If you
> > don't import M (T(..)), then '
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 08:10:18PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>
> Either way, lemme know if this is all fine, and I'll make the 0.10.0.2
> release.
Looks good, thanks! I've updated the GHC 7.6 repo to match the tag.
Thanks
Ian
___
Glasgow-haskell-u
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:31:09PM +0100, Goetz Isenmann wrote:
>
> This change
>
> https://github.com/ghc/ghc/commit/106f0434144199276add8860c146c542cc67513b
>
> is missing for a success build on DragonFly-3.2/x86_64
Thanks, I've merged it to the 7.6 branch now.
Thanks
Ian
Hi Sean,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 04:04:34PM +0100, Sean Leather wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> > Please test as much as possible; bugs are much cheaper if we find them
> > before the release!
> >
>
> I tried to build the source
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:24:23AM +0100, JP Moresmau wrote:
>
> let prTS = lexTokenStream sb lexLoc flg
>
> This prints:
> ["ITblockComment \" CPP #\"","ITmodule","ITconid
> \"Main\"","ITwhere","ITvocurly","ITvarid \"main\"","ITequal","ITvarid
> \"undefined\""]
>
> Why is the fir
Hi Jan,
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 04:08:23PM +0100, Jan Stolarek wrote:
>
> [killy@xerxes : /dane/uczelnia/projekty/ghc-build] ./configure
> checking for gfind... no
> checking for find... /usr/bin/find
> checking for GHC version date... configure: WARNING: cannot determine
> snapshot version: no
Hi Tim,
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 11:53:32AM -0300, tim.beech wrote:
>
> My build script unpacks the binary distribution for "unknown linux" and
> builds GHC against that. (Both are version 7.4.2.) I have avoided
> installing anything else (such as the Haskell Platform) so as to keep as
> close as
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 09:41:12AM +0100, Jan Stolarek wrote:
> Dnia piątek, 14 grudnia 2012, Ian Lynagh napisał:
> > I think the main problem is that it's a very broad question. The answer
> > to "how should I get started" would be completely different for if you
Hi Carter,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 04:34:29PM -0500, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> A related question I have is that I've some code that will map the
> singleton Nats to Ints, and last time I looked into this/ had a chat on the
> ghc-users list, it sounded like sometimes having Integer values constru
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:53:36PM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> I've been tracking down a few (unrelated) performance bugs related to
> conversions between primitive types. What these issues had in common
> is that some rule failed to fire and the conversion went via Integer,
> killing performan
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 02:44:19PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> This thread has made it clear that we should do more to help people find a
> "way in" to GHC.
I think the main problem is that it's a very broad question. The answer
to "how should I get started" would be completely different f
Hi Joachim,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:20:35AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> I built GHC 7.6.2-rc1 for Debian.
Thanks for testing!
> Provides: haddock, [-haddock-interface-21-] {+haddock-interface-22+}
>
> i.e. upstream has bumped the haddock interface number. I really was not
> expectin
Hi all,
Following a recent discussion, we propose to reorganise the GHC-related
mailing lists so that we end up with:
glasgow-haskell-users
For user discussions
ghc-devs
For developer discussions
ghc-commits
For automated commit messages from the git reposit
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 05:45:17PM -0500, wren ng thornton wrote:
>
> I'm one of those curmudgeons still working on OSX 10.5.8. Recently I
> finally got around to building the latest GHC and, FWIW, everything
> seems to have worked out fine. I did get a few failed tests in the
> testsuite though,
We are pleased to announce the first release candidate for GHC 7.6.2:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.6.2-rc1/
This includes the source tarball, installers for Windows, and
bindists for Windows, Linux, OS X and FreeBSD, on x86 and x86_64.
We plan to make the 7.6.2 release early in 2013.
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 09:15:06PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 06/12/12 17:04, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >
> >It's true that we do give e-mailing it as a (less preferred) way for
> >users to submit a bug on
> > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ReportABug
Hi Ron,
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 03:33:01PM -0500, Ron Alford wrote:
> I'm trying to see if this is reproducible, or it's just my machine.
This sounds like
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7043
Thanks
Ian
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mail
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 04:23:02PM +0100, Dennis Felsing wrote:
>
> Is there a way to extend GHCi without copying some of its source code?
Someone was looking at moving the ghci code into a library, which may
mean you need to copy less code, at least. I'm not sure what the status
of that is, thou
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:11:07PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> Dear GHC HQ: Would you advice against or for providing a RTS in the
> thr_debug_p and thr_debug ways in the Debian package?
The main reasons not to add RTS ways are that they take time to build,
and use disk space once built. F
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:37:22PM -0800, David Terei wrote:
> I have always considered the LLVM code generator my responsibility and
> will continue to do so.
Great, thanks!
> I don't seem to find the time to make
> improvements to it but make sure to keep it bug free and working with
> the late
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:42:33PM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> I will maintain the I/O manager as per usual
Excellent, thanks!
There are a couple of tickets that are currently assigned to me that
look like they might be IO manager bugs:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4245
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 09:56:55PM +1100, Ben Lippmeier wrote:
>
> I suppose I'm the default owner of the register allocators and non-LLVM
> native code generators.
Great, thanks!
By the way, if you feel like doing some hacking this holiday season,
then you might be interested in
http://hac
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 12:29:01PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> My own understanding is this:
>
> A GHC *user* is someone who uses GHC, but doesn't care how it is implemented.
> A GHC *developer* is someone who wants to work on GHC itself in some way.
>
> The current mailing lists:
>
> * g
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 06:25:49PM +0200, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
>
> +1. I'd like to follow GHC development discussions, but getting all the
> commits is too much.
I'm surprised by this, FWIW. I think skimming the commits is a good way
to get an idea of what's going on, while discussions between
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 09:38:10AM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
> wrote:
> > If Bryan and Johan are the Performance Tsars the future looks bright. Or at
> > least fast. Thank you.
>
> If someone could point me to the build bot script that we r
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:28:41PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> Static by default, GHCi is dynamic:
> * still can't do this on Windows
We can do it on Windows: We can use side-by-side assemblies.
(well, assuming we fix #5987).
Thanks
Ian
___
Gla
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:04:44AM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
>
> >Building them also in the dynamic way for the sake of GHCi users seems
> >possible.
>
> Perhaps Debian could just ship a GHCi that uses the RTS linker, as
> now? The change is to be made for "some platforms", we could opt t
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 01:34:22PM +, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
> On 28/11/2012 13:13, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> >> More generally, if you can implement the "half a plan" you mentioned
> >> elsewhere in the thread for quickly building both static and dynamic
>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 01:28:54PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 28/11/12 12:48, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:20:57AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> >>
> >>My personal opinion is that we should switch to dynamic-by-default
> >>on all x86_6
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 06:43:09AM +, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
> On 27/11/2012 14:52, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> > GHC HEAD now has support for using dynamic libraries by default (and in
> > particular, using dynamic libraries and the system linker in GHCi) for a
>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 04:00:02PM +0900, Jens Petersen wrote:
>
> Could you say more about the impact to ghc-7.6.2 Cabal?
For example, question 8 is about whether Cabal should also build static
libraries for a dynamic-by-default compiler. We would like to ship a
version of Cabal that does the ri
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:20:57AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is that we should switch to dynamic-by-default
> on all x86_64 platforms, and OS X x86. The performance penalty for
> x86/Linux is too high (30%),
FWIW, if they're able to move from x86 static to x86_64 dynamic
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:09:58AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 27/11/12 23:28, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> >
> >Hence, Debian will continue to provide its libraries built the static
> >way.
>
> So let me try to articulate the options, because I think there are
> some dependencies that aren't obv
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:28:31AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> here comes the obligatory butting in by the Debian Haskell Group:
>
> Given the current sensitivity of the ABI hashes we really do not want to
> have Programs written in Haskell have a runtime dependency on all the
> included H
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:34:03PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> Ian Lynagh writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > There are also some policy questions we need to answer about how Cabal
> > will work with a GHC that uses dynamic libraries by default.
>
> btw, how is it
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:34:59PM -0800, Evan Laforge wrote:
> I don't totally understand how ghci loading would work. I assume that
> for external packages it will go load x.so instead of x.a, but what
> about local modules? I assume ghc -c is still going to produce .o
> files, so does that me
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 08:38:21PM +0100, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 02:52:48PM +0000, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > The various issues are described in a wiki page here:
> > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/DynamicByDefault
> >
> > If you ha
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:07:34PM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:22:12AM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> >>IIRC, one of the problems with dynamic linking in GHC is that when
> >>the GHC ve
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:22:12AM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >GHC HEAD now has support for using dynamic libraries by default (and in
> >particular, using dynamic libraries and the system linker in GHCi) for a
> >number of
:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/DynamicByDefault
If you have a few minutes to read it then we'd be glad to hear your
feedback, to help us in making our decisions
Thanks
Ian
--
Ian Lynagh, Haskell Consultant
Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-type
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 05:24:06PM -0800, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
>
> There used to be a value called `tracingDynFlags` that I could use to dump
> values, but it has disappeared... Did it get moved somewhere, or is there
> a better way to get the same effect?
There is now StaticFlags.unsafeGlobalD
Hi Apostolos,
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 09:07:56AM -0400, asyropou...@aol.com wrote:
>
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.4.1/html/building/sec-porting-ghc.html#sec-booting-from-hc
Some community members have made Solaris binary distributions in the
past. It would be easier to start from one of
Hi Kazu,
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 01:37:32PM +0900, Kazu Yamamoto wrote:
>
> I seems to us (my friends and me) that term rewriting rules for
> ByteString are not fired in recent GHCs.
Thanks for the report. I've filed a ticket here:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7374
Thanks
Ian
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:48:13PM -0700, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was just trying to build the GHC-7.6 branch from source and the build
> failed with type-errors, because the libraries used by GHC have moved on
> since the release, and "sync all" just gets the most recent version.
Us
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 06:32:38PM +0200, Christian Hoener zu Siederdissen
wrote:
> Awesome,
>
> I have been playing with GHC 7.6.0 until today and been very happy. Btw.
> isn't this the version that officially includes "-fnew-codegen" / HOOPL?
>
> Because the new codegen is optimizing the my AD
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:42:53AM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> 2. Could you please push all the packages that were released in GHC
> 7.6.1 to Hackage as well?
I've now uploaded those that we maintain.
Thanks
Ian
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing
=
The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 7.6.1
=
The GHC Team is pleased to announce a new major release of GHC, 7.6.1.
Here are some of the highlights
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:28:46AM +, Philip Holzenspies wrote:
> Below message was rejected because I included the screenshot which was to
> big. The screenshot referred to is now here:
>
> http://tinypic.com/r/2yy6tcy/6
(screenshot shows:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/librari
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:45:51AM +, Philip Holzenspies wrote:
>
> Absolutely true, but I came across this in the GHC-source itself. I would
> like the GHC-source to be literateable (not a work, but you know what I mean)
> in markdown.
FWIW, I'm not sure the work necessary to maintain corr
We are pleased to announce the first release candidate for GHC 7.6.1:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.6.1-rc1/
This includes the source tarball, installers for 32bit and 64bit
Windows, and bindists for amd64/Linux, i386/Linux, amd64/OSX and
i386/OSX.
Please test as much as possible; bugs
Hi Johan,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:06:39PM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > If a GHC release needs an unreleased change in one of the libraries, and
> > the maintainer (for whatever reason) is not responding to e-mails,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:42:24AM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:30:02PM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
> >>
> >> I just want to see things changed. :)
> >
> > We're happy to
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:30:02PM -0700, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> I just want to see things changed. :)
We're happy to try to improve things, but I'm not sure what change you
want exactly.
We could change the default for GHC stable branches to:
* Use the tag for the latest release, unless that
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 02:34:34PM +0100, José Pedro Magalhães wrote:
>
> (Btw, validate goes through. Does validate not build the user's guide?)
It only builds it if the tools are available. I think that's mainly
because they're a bit fiddly to install on Windows.
Thanks
Ian
Hi Bas,
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 05:11:35PM +0200, Bas van Dijk wrote:
>
> module Main where
>
> import Foreign
> import qualified Foreign.Concurrent as FC
> import Control.Concurrent
> import Bindings.Libusb.InitializationDeinitialization
>
> main :: IO ()
> main = do
> ctxPtr <- alloca $ \c
Dear GHC users,
Windows 64bit GHC port: First alpha release
---
The Industrial Haskell Group has recently funded work by Well-Typed to
make a Windows 64bit port of GHC. The port will officially be released
as part of the upcoming GHC 7.6.1 release, but in
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 03:07:09PM +0200, Soenke Hahn wrote:
>
> If not, does that mean,
> ghc-7.4.1 does not support OS X 10.5?
As far as I know, if you build GHC 7.4.1 on OS X 10.5 then it will work,
but I haven't tried it so I may be wrong.
However, binaries built on newer versions (including
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 08:44:26PM +1000, Tim Cuthbertson wrote:
>
> Configuring hsc2hs-0.67...
> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `libraries/process/ghc.mk'. Stop.
> make: *** [all] Error 2
>
> Any hints?
That file should be included in the source tarball.
Thanks
Ian
___
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:09:47AM +1000, Tim Cuthbertson wrote:
> I signed up for an account on http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ to
> report a couple of bugs, but can't file them until my email address is
> verified.
>
> I've tried two different email addresses, waited more than 24 hours,
> a
We are pleased to announce the first release candidate for GHC 7.4.2:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.4.2-rc1/
This includes the source tarball, installers for OS X and Windows, and
bindists for amd64/Linux, i386/Linux, amd64/FreeBSD and i386/FreeBSD.
Please test as much as possible; bugs
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 09:22:04PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> A quick 7.4.2 release plan update:
>
> We've been having trouble with our nightly builds, so we haven't managed
> to put out a release candidate yet. As soon as we have builds ready,
> we'll put t
1 - 100 of 761 matches
Mail list logo
