I definitely think impl(ghc) should cover GHCJS, as it effectively just is
a GHC backend (even if not part of GHC). Doing otherwise would be a bit
like having impl(ghc) be false when compiling with -fllvm IMHO. The value
of GHCJS is that it's supposed to be able to compile most existing packages
as-is.
Just my two cents. :-)
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Luite Stegeman stege...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should definitely fix the packages, not put a hack in Cabal.
In the latest hackage archive, there are 462 packages that use the
impl(ghc) flag, including lots of very common packages. For example binary:
if impl(ghc = 7.2.1)
cpp-options: -DGENERICS
other-modules: Data.Binary.Generic
if impl(ghc = 7.6)
-- prior to ghc-7.4 generics lived in ghc-prim
build-depends: ghc-prim
Is there a generic way to do this without impl ghc checks? Otherwise all
these impl(ghc = x) flag checks have to be changed to impl(ghc = x) ||
impl(ghcjs = y), not something I'd be looking forward to...
Also I personally don't really see it as a hack (of course I'm biased
since I've been using it for a while). It just allows you to specify that
compiler x is based on compiler y, so that unless explicitly queried
otherwise you can assume that flags for 'y' hold for 'x'.
luite
___
cabal-devel mailing list
cabal-devel@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
___
cabal-devel mailing list
cabal-devel@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel