Where do you want to head from here? I can fix the patches but you seem to be saying you'd like a different approach all together?
Cheers, David On 13 February 2012 05:46, Simon Marlow <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13/02/2012 12:50, Simon Marlow wrote: >> >> As of the nightly build on 11 Feb, we have three new GHCi-related test >> failures: >> >> ghci/prog009 ghci.prog009 [bad stdout] (ghci) >> ghci/scripts ghci036 [bad stderr] (ghci) >> ghci/scripts ghci038 [bad stderr] (ghci) >> > > Confirmed that these two reversions fix the regressions. > > commit 4a0973bb25f8d328f1a41d43d9f45c374178113c > Author: Simon Marlow <[email protected]> > Date: Mon Feb 13 13:22:20 2012 +0000 > > Revert "Don't add a bad import to the saved context." > > This reverts commit e5272d9bf2a65b7da8364803fcafbd2012b7de97. > > Reverting to fix validate regression, and pending a redesign of the > changes. > > commit 1cbd950d105f3e8cd269a671035e1388b9249ba2 > Author: Simon Marlow <[email protected]> > Date: Mon Feb 13 13:21:42 2012 +0000 > > Revert "Have :load work under -XSafe in GHCi." > > This reverts commit 5e9e07a33e17da01245f0cea78e6a6f8a32ac77d. > > Reverting to fix validate regression, and pending a redesign of the > changes. > > > Unfortunately they introduce a bunch of regressions in the safehaskell > tests. > > But I'm fairly certain we want to do these in a different way, so I'm > pushing the reverts for now. > > Cheers, > Simon _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
