On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Conrad Parker <con...@metadecks.org> wrote:
> (I wish this project was in git so I could just reply to the patch inline > ;-) > > Regarding this comment in the docs: > > +For brevity, the example package > +does not include a library or any normal executables, but a real package > would > +be required to have at least one library or executable. > > is there a technical reason for requiring that the package contain > some other library or executable? It seems like it would be useful to > allow benchmark-only packages that eg. provide a benchmark of some > task that ties together two other library packages (st. the benchmark > wouldn't naturally fit into either of those packages), or shootout > submissions etc. It made sense when executables and libraries where the only possible sections, but it might not make sense anymore. Duncan, is this a technical or policy restriction? -- Johan
_______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
