On 2013-11-05 at 22:08:11 +0100, Gabor Greif wrote: > I suppose the integer-simple library also needs the <new-primops> treatment. > Many embedded platforms won't have GMP. > Should we just provide 'error "unimplemented"' stubs?
Well, I extended the precedent set by http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/integer-gmp-0.5.0.0/GHC-Integer-GMP-Internals.html where the underlying `gcdInteger#` and `lcmInteger#` primitives are provided only by `integer-gmp`, and their wrappers are located in a module whose name clearly denotes these as being specific to GMP. This should be regarded as an optimization to tap into GMP's highly optimized primitives, which afaik can't be easily added outside of integer-gmp. However, in the long-term, I don't think packages should build-depend directly on integer-{gmp,simple} (I was surprised to see that `text` does this), but instead an `integer` "super-package" could abstract over the decision whether `integer-gmp` or `integer-simple` is used as Integer "backend" library, and pass-thru a common set of functions, while enforcing that no function is missing and/or has a diverging type. Cheers, hvr _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs