On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 01:36:13PM +0200, Johan Tibell wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Daniel Fischer > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thursday 25 August 2011, 10:39:29, Johan Tibell wrote: > >> P.S. Could someone please remind me why containers ships with GHC? > > > > Some other packages shipped with GHC depend on containers, e.g. hoopl, > > template-haskell, haskeline, binary. > > So GHC uses some packages in its implementation, but that shouldn't > have to mean that it also needs to export these. Is this a technical > issue?
GHC needs to ship with anything that ghc-the-library transitively depends on, yes. > As a thought experiment lets consider what would happen if GHC would > like to use unordered-containers in its implementation. Should GHC now > be making releases to unordered-containers? That doesn't sound like a > good thing. There are certainly disadvantages to making GHC use a library. yes. We have to weigh them up against the advantages we get from using the library. Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
