On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 08:53 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 12:13 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> >
> > Yes, if we know we're using it. If we specify -package blah on the
> > command line then we do know we're using it and everything works
> > (because ghc
Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 12:13 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
This sounds like a chicken and egg problem. To know which package
include directories to use GHCi needs to know which packages your module
uses. However to work out which packages it needs it has to load the
module whic
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 16:04 -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Duncan Coutts
> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 12:13 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > Perhaps I'm missing something, but if applicative-numbers is
> an exposed
> > package, sho
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Duncan Coutts
wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 12:13 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> > > This sounds like a chicken and egg problem. To know which package
> > > include directories to use GHCi needs to know which packages your
> module
> > > uses. However to work out
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 12:13 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > This sounds like a chicken and egg problem. To know which package
> > include directories to use GHCi needs to know which packages your module
> > uses. However to work out which packages it needs it has to load the
> > module which means
Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 23:43 -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
The applicative-numbers package [1] provides an include file. With
ghci, the include file isn't being found, though with cabal+ghc it is
found.
My test source is just two lines:
{-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
#include "Applica
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 st
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 -packag
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.
- C
On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 23:43 -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
> The applicative-numbers package [1] provides an include file. With
> ghci, the include file isn't being found, though with cabal+ghc it is
> found.
>
> My test source is just two lines:
>
> {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
> #include "ApplicativeNume
The applicative-numbers package [1] provides an include file. With ghci,
the include file isn't being found, though with cabal+ghc it is found.
My test source is just two lines:
{-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
#include "ApplicativeNumeric-inc.hs"
I'd sure appreciate it if someone could take a look at the
11 matches
Mail list logo
