On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 10:53:31AM -0700, Stefan O'Rear wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 10:42:09AM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Lennart Kolmodin wrote:
> > > I think the LANGUAGE pragma is much better than OPTIONS_GHC, for several
> > > reasons.
> > >
>
On 05/04/07, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A very big problem with the pragma as it relates to
Distribution.Extension is that it is unextensable.
Yet another use case for Andres Löh and Ralf Hinze's open datatypes
[1]. Shame they're still lacking an implementation.
[1]: http://www.in
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 10:42:09AM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Lennart Kolmodin wrote:
> > I think the LANGUAGE pragma is much better than OPTIONS_GHC, for several
> > reasons.
> >
> > * It's compiler independent.
> > * It's clear that you're only adding
On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Lennart Kolmodin wrote:
> I think the LANGUAGE pragma is much better than OPTIONS_GHC, for several
> reasons.
>
> * It's compiler independent.
> * It's clear that you're only adding extensions, not any random compiler
> flag.
> * It plays nicely with Ian's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
S. Alexander Jacobson wrote:
> I think the LANGUAGE pragma is better than the OPTIONS_GHC pragma but I
> am relatively indifferent on that issue. My only point is that module
> authors should put this information in the module source rather than in
> t
I think the LANGUAGE pragma is better than the OPTIONS_GHC pragma but
I am relatively indifferent on that issue. My only point is that
module authors should put this information in the module source rather
than in the build system.
-Alex-
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Alec Berryman wrote:
S. Alexan
"S. Alexander Jacobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The correct answer, I believe, is to require that module authors put
> flags in the module themselves where they belong. At very least it
> should be considred bad style not to have them in your code and really
> what would make more sen
S. Alexander Jacobson on 2007-03-23 17:16:26 -0400:
> The correct answer, I believe, is to require that module authors put
> flags in the module themselves where they belong.
Does the OPTIONS_GHC pragma solve your issue?
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/using-ghc.html#sour
In theory, Haskell modules should contain all information necessary to
interpret/compile them properly. In practice, many modules don't because their
authors are flagging required language extensions in build systems rather than
in module sources. This practice causes problems because then it
