Even though I am using GHC almost daily, I agree it is a pile of junk. I
still wonder how you are going to manage to keep Haskell but not having
GHC anymore.
As far as I know there are only two Haskell compilers actively developed
except for GHC: UHC and JHC. The other implementations are not
How are other distros/OS doing? Do we really need to bootstrap each
time? Could not the old working binary be saved to some kind of
semiofficial porttools.tgz used on the computer for building all the
ports? We would then have two flavors of GHC: The normal one installed
to /usr/local/ and one
On 2013/05/08 11:04, Lars Engblom wrote:
How are other distros/OS doing? Do we really need to bootstrap each
time? Could not the old working binary be saved to some kind of
semiofficial porttools.tgz used on the computer for building all the
ports?
This is what we do at present, the port uses
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 07:43:57AM +0300, Lars Engblom wrote:
Even though I am using GHC almost daily, I agree it is a pile of junk. I
still wonder how you are going to manage to keep Haskell but not having
GHC anymore.
I won't. What I meant with this is not about Haskell but about
ghc was
please don't!
we still need ghc!
https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/331918309916295168
;-)
Matthias Kilian(k...@outback.escape.de) on 2013.05.07 23:50:25 +0200:
Spoiler: I'm not talking about Haskell but about ghc here.
I'd like to remove lang/ghc from the ports tree, because it's
Spoiler: I'm not talking about Haskell but about ghc here.
I'd like to remove lang/ghc from the ports tree, because it's fucked
up beyond repair:
- configure runs ghc-pwd (instead of just pwd) to determine the current
working directory. ghc-pwd is a program written in Haskell. In the
past,
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Matthias Kilian k...@outback.escape.de wrote:
Spoiler: I'm not talking about Haskell but about ghc here.
To ask a possibly dumb question, what are our other options for
Haskell at the moment? E.g., it looks like x11/xmonad depends on
lang/ghc, so does removing
