mer...@inconsistent.nl
Verzonden: zaterdag 16 augustus 2014 00:40
Aan: haskell-pr...@haskell.org; glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Onderwerp: Revival: PROPOSAL: Literate haskell and module file names
Ola!
I raised this proposal earlier this year and got to busy to follow up
Verzonden: zaterdag 16 augustus 2014 00:40
Aan: haskell-pr...@haskell.org; glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Onderwerp: Revival: PROPOSAL: Literate haskell and module file names
Ola!
I raised this proposal earlier this year and got to busy to follow up, this
week I was suddenly reminded and decided
...@inconsistent.nl
Verzonden: zaterdag 16 augustus 2014 00:40
Aan: haskell-pr...@haskell.org; glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Onderwerp: Revival: PROPOSAL: Literate haskell and module file names
Ola!
I raised this proposal earlier this year and got to busy to follow up, this
week I was suddenly
mer...@inconsistent.nl
Verzonden: zaterdag 16 augustus 2014 00:40
Aan: haskell-pr...@haskell.org; glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Onderwerp: Revival: PROPOSAL: Literate haskell and module file names
Ola!
I raised this proposal earlier this year and got to busy to follow up,
this week
Ola!
I raised this proposal earlier this year and got to busy to follow up, this
week I was suddenly reminded and decided to reraise this. To summarise the
discussion up until this point:
There was no real opposition to the general idea, the only real objection to
the original proposal was
On 17/03/2014 13:08, Edward Kmett wrote:
Foo+rst.lhs does nicely dodge the collision with jhc.
How does ghc do the search now? By trying each alternative in turn?
Yes - see compiler/main/Finder.hs
Cheers,
Simon
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Merijn Verstraaten
mer...@inconsistent.nl
Foo+rst.lhs does nicely dodge the collision with jhc.
How does ghc do the search now? By trying each alternative in turn?
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Merijn Verstraaten
mer...@inconsistent.nlwrote:
I agree that this could collide, see my beginning remark that I believe
that the report
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Edward Kmett ekm...@gmail.com wrote:
Foo+rst.lhs does nicely dodge the collision with jhc.
Is this legal on Windows?
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com
2014-03-17 14:22 GMT+01:00 Brandon Allbery allber...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Edward Kmett ekm...@gmail.com wrote:
Foo+rst.lhs does nicely dodge the collision with jhc.
Is this legal on Windows?
According to
haskell-pr...@haskell.org
Ämne: Re: PROPOSAL: Literate haskell and module file names
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Edward Kmett ekm...@gmail.com wrote:
Foo+rst.lhs does nicely dodge the collision with jhc.
Is this legal on Windows?
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh
Ola!
I didn't know what the most appropriate venue for this proposal was so I
crossposted to haskell-prime and glasgow-haskell-users, if this isn't the right
venue I welcome advice where to take this proposal.
Currently the report does not specify the mapping between filenames and module
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 16.03.2014, 13:56 +0100 schrieb Merijn Verstraaten:
Cons:
GHC would have to either maintain a possibly long of variants to look
for ([.hs, .lhs, .rst.lhs, .md.lhs, .svg.lhs, .docx.lhs]),
or look for Foo.*.lhs.
I’d find the latter acceptable, but it should be noted.
My personal approach would have been to make ghc accept Foo.*.lhs,
maintaining a list of potential file format seems arduous and error prone.
Cheers,
Merijn
On Mar 16, 2014, at 14:13 , Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 16.03.2014, 13:56 +0100 schrieb Merijn Verstraaten:
Cons:
Idk, this behavior of doing Data.Vector.lhs seems pretty awesome. I
actually might start doing that. That ghc allows that seems pretty darn
awesome. And handy too
On Sunday, March 16, 2014, Merijn Verstraaten mer...@inconsistent.nl
wrote:
My personal approach would have been to make ghc
The behaviour could be invoked only for lower-case parts, but that may
prove problematic on case-insensitive filesystems like Windows.
On 16/03/2014 13:52, Carter Schonwald wrote:
Idk, this behavior of doing Data.Vector.lhs seems pretty awesome. I
actually might start doing that. That ghc
One problem with Foo.*.hs or even Foo.md.hs mapping to the module name
Foois that as I recall JHC will look for
Data.Vector in Data.Vector.hs as well as Data/Vector.hs
This means that on a case insensitive file system Foo.MD.hs matches both
conventions.
Do I want to block an change to GHC
Can we get a little more information on what pandoc is doing? Is there a
documentation link?
In part am wondering if it is possible to have a Foo.hs.md file that pandoc
compiles down to Foo.hs with or without help from GHC.
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Merijn Verstraaten
I agree that this could collide, see my beginning remark that I believe that
the report should provide a minimal specification how to map modules to
filenames and vice versa.
Anyhoo, I'm not married to this specific suggestion. Carter suggested
Foo+rst.lhs on IRC, other options would be
18 matches
Mail list logo
