Andy Stewart wrote:
Now GHC use .hs-boot fix mutually recursive modules problem, yes it
can work, but it not pretty.
So GHC can fix this problem automatically at next release version?
Please add yourself (that is, your e-mail address) to the cc: on the
corresponding bug-report, if you want
Dear GHC developers:
First thanks for your work with GHC!
And i have suggestion for mutually recursive modules problem:
Now GHC use .hs-boot fix mutually recursive modules problem, yes it
can work, but it not pretty.
So GHC can fix this problem automatically at next release version
Thanks Roberto!
Roberto Zunino wrote:
Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
There is no way to create a A.hs-boot file that has all of
(1) Allows A.hs-boot to be compiled without compiling B.hs first
(2) Allows B.hs (with a {-# SOURCE #-} pragma) to be compiled after
A.hs-boot
(3) Allows A.hs to
Hi,
module A(A) where
data A
deriving Show
I think you should use instance Show A rather than deriving Show.
All the boot file needs to do is say that the instance exists, not
explain how it is constructed.
Cheers,
Ganesh
Richard
I'm assuming you have ready the GHC manual?
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/separate-compilation.html#mutual-recursion
Yes, mutually recursive modules are fine (in GHC anyway), and should work as
advertised there. Please do produce a test case if not.
Thanks
Hello
I've been doing some work with mutually recursive modules (MRMs). I'm
familiar with the section in the User's Guide on how to do this and have
successfully worked with MRMs with simple dependencies. However, I have
created a set of MRMs that I can't seem to get to compile because
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Richard Giraud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does the current {-# SOURCE #-}/.hs-boot scheme allow for compilation of
arbitrary MRMs? Or are there known cases where it doesn't work? If there
are cases where it doesn't work, are there other options?
I don't think
Antoine Latter wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Richard Giraud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does the current {-# SOURCE #-}/.hs-boot scheme allow for compilation of
arbitrary MRMs? Or are there known cases where it doesn't work? If there
are cases where it doesn't work, are there other
| If I have two modules which are mutually recursive;
|
| module A where
| import B
| data TA = TA TB deriving (Data, Typeable)
|
| module B where
| import A
| data TB = TB TA deriving (Data, Typeable)
|
| How do I go about writing a hi-boot that will work in GHC?
Good question. At the
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:21:26 +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Separate 'deriving' from the data type decl, so you can say
derive( Data TA, Typeable TA )
anywhere. People sometimes ask for this for other reasons.
2. Allow instances in hi-boot files
You might
Hi Simon!
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 01:21:26PM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Two fixes suggest themselves
1. Separate 'deriving' from the data type decl, so you can say
derive( Data TA, Typeable TA )
anywhere. People sometimes ask for this for other reasons.
Good thing. Plus,
Hi,
If I have two modules which are mutually recursive;
module A where
data TA = TA String deriving (Data, Typeable)
module B where
data TB = TB TA deriving (Data, Typeable)
How do I got about writing a hi-boot that will work in GHC? The problem
is that to do proper XML Schema
Malaquias [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 24 October 2000 16:00
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Compiling mutually recursive modules involving instances
|
|
| Hello.
|
| I am having difficulties in compiling mutually recursive
| modules involving classes and instances in GHC 4.08.1.
| Basicaly I
shown in "Monad Transformers and Modular
Interpreters", by Mark Jones and others. When I progress
in that I would make some comments.
The manual should really say this
The manual also says a new, better, higher level way for
dealing with mutually recursive modules is in the works.
Is
OK wise guys, now you've changed (incompatibly) the format of
.hi files,
how can I rewrite these pre-404 hi-boot files so that they
work for 404?
Can you summarise the changes?
The main change recently was to remove the use of '!' instead of '.' to
indicate that a particular identifier
OK wise guys, now you've changed (incompatibly) the format of .hi files,
how can I rewrite these pre-404 hi-boot files so that they work for 404?
Can you summarise the changes?
16 matches
Mail list logo
