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
I have reached an impasse in designing a Haskell API for the google's
protocol-buffers data language / format. (
http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/overview.html )
The messages in protobuf are defined in a namespace that nests in the usual
hierarchical OO style that Java
And there is no way ghc can compile these in separate modules.
I may be being redundant here, but you may not know that GHC actually
can compile mutually recursive modules. See
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/separate-compilation.html#mutual-recursion
. Of course, this is
Ah, a teachable moment. One of us is not entirely correct about what GHC can do
with this example. Hopefully I am wrong, but my experiments...
Max Bolingbroke wrote:
And there is no way ghc can compile these in separate modules.
I may be being redundant here, but you may not know that GHC
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
Consider these 3 files:
A.hs:
module A(A) where
import B(B)
data A = A B
B.hs
module B(B) where
import A(A)
data B = B A
Main.hs
module Main where
import A
import B
main = return ()
Sooner or later you want generalize your datatypes. Then
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 compiled after A.hs-boot with a consistent
What about generating the verbose accessor/single module code, and
then creating a hierarchical module space as well, all importing your
Base module, and reexporting the data types you want as well as less
verbosely named accessor functions? Of course, this will break record
update syntax,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Henning Thielemann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sooner or later you want generalize your datatypes. Then you can define
data A b = A b
and you do not need to import B any longer. I do not know if this is a
generally applicable approach, but it helped me in some
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:21:16PM +0100, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
I have reached an impasse in designing a Haskell API for the google's
The messages in protobuf are defined in a namespace that nests in the usual
hierarchical OO style that Java encourages.
To avoid namespace conflicts, I made a
John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
I have reached an impasse in designing a Haskell API for the
google's The messages in protobuf are defined in a namespace
that nests in the usual hierarchical OO style that Java
encourages.
To avoid namespace conflicts, I
11 matches
Mail list logo
