Re: On the record pattern synonyms patch

2015-11-13 Thread Matthew Pickering
Hi Edward, I don't understand what should and shouldn't be in interface files. I tried to make the least changes to get everything still to work. The change was because of the corresponding change to the datatype.

Re: too many lines too long

2015-11-13 Thread Richard Eisenberg
Could you add your comment to the ticket I've created? https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11082 As for case conventions: The parts of GHC I play in have a fairly reliable convention: underscores for local things (both local variables and non-exported helper functions) and camel case for

Can't build current HEAD

2015-11-13 Thread Jan Stolarek
I am unable to build current HEAD. I'm getting a build error in Outputable module: compiler/utils/Outputable.hs:1046:28: Not in scope: type constructor or class ‘CallStack’ compiler/utils/Outputable.hs:1047:23: Not in scope: ‘showCallStack’ The most likely culprit is

Re: Can't build current HEAD

2015-11-13 Thread Jan Stolarek
I just verified this does not happen when building with GHC 7.8.4, so if our build machines (harbormaster, travis) are building using 7.8.4 this might not show up in the logs. Janek Dnia piątek, 13 listopada 2015, Jan Stolarek napisał: > I am unable to build current HEAD. I'm getting a build

Re: Pre-Proposal: Introspective Template Haskell

2015-11-13 Thread Geoffrey Mainland
Sounds like a good pan to me. Note that we would still need a small GHC-version-specific shim, somewhere, to define the Q monad, which does occasionally change. We could push it into the GHC API. Having three Haskell ASTs has always been a pain---it would be nice to finally fix this situation.

Re: Pre-Proposal: Introspective Template Haskell

2015-11-13 Thread Richard Eisenberg
This proposal now has a home at wiki:TemplateHaskell/Introspective and #11081. I think exploring how this might help haskell-src-exts would be very fruitful. Richard On Nov 13, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Geoffrey Mainland wrote: > Sounds like a good pan to me. Note that we would