Thanks for the clarification, Duncan. Seems an easy partial solution would be a single pass (before CPP) that notices just the #include directives. Consult the package database to find those packages. That route would find direct includes but not indirect ones. An optional and still-easy next step would be to look inside those includes for further #include directives. I'm unsure whether the cabal solution is as powerful as the single-level include method or the recursive one.
- Conal On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Duncan Coutts <duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk>wrote: > On Sun, 2009-03-15 at 09:13 -0700, Conal Elliott wrote: > > That did it. I've added ":set -package applicative-numbers" to > > my .ghci and am back in business. Thanks! > > > > IIUC, there's an inconsistency in ghci's treatment of modules vs > > include files, in that modules will be found without -package, but > > include files won't. Room for improvement, perhaps. > > But that's because of the circularity I described. GHC can chase Haskell > imports because it can parse Haskell, but chasing CPP #includes would > require us to re-implement cpp. Perhaps we could do it by modifying > cpphs. > > Duncan > >
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
