Re: 177 unexpected test failures on a new system -- is this yet another linker issue?

[Reid Barton]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Ömer Sinan Ağacan
 wrote:
> I'm trying to validate on a new system (not sure if related, but it has gcc
> 6.2.1 and ld 2.27.0), and I'm having 177 unexpected failures, most (maybe
> even
> all) of them are similar to this one:
>
> => T5976(ext-interp) 1 of 1 [0, 0, 0]
> cd "./th/T5976.run" &&  "/home/omer/haskell/ghc/inplace/test
> spaces/ghc-stage2" -c T5976.hs -dcore-dno-debug-output -XTemplateHaskell
> -package template-haskell -fexternal-interpreter -v0
> Actual stderr output differs from expected:
> --- ./th/T5976.run/T5976.stderr.normalised  2016-11-10
> 23:01:39.351997560 -0500
> +++ ./th/T5976.run/T5976.comp.stderr.normalised 2016-11-10
> 23:01:39.351997560 -0500
> @@ -1,7 +1,4 @@
> -
> -T5976.hs:1:1:
> -Exception when trying to run compile-time code:
> -  bar
> -CallStack (from HasCallStack):
> -  error, called at T5976.hs:: in :Main
> -Code: error ((++) "foo " error "bar")
> +ghc-iserv.bin: internal loadArchive: GNU-variant filename offset not
> found while reading filename f

Did this line get truncated? It might help to have the rest of it.

Regards,
Reid Barton
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Re: 177 unexpected test failures on a new system -- is this yet another linker issue?

[Ben Gamari]

Ömer Sinan Ağacan  writes:

> I'm trying to validate on a new system (not sure if related, but it has gcc
> 6.2.1 and ld 2.27.0), and I'm having 177 unexpected failures, most (maybe
> even
> all) of them are similar to this one:

Hmm, I have a rather similar setup and yet I haven't seen this locally.
I'm not sure what's going on here but the filename cited in the error
message looks quite odd. I wonder if this is due to normalization by the
testsuite driver or some other issue.

Cheers,

- Ben



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

177 unexpected test failures on a new system -- is this yet another linker issue?

[Ömer Sinan Ağacan]

I'm trying to validate on a new system (not sure if related, but it has gcc
6.2.1 and ld 2.27.0), and I'm having 177 unexpected failures, most (maybe
even
all) of them are similar to this one:

=> T5976(ext-interp) 1 of 1 [0, 0, 0]
cd "./th/T5976.run" &&  "/home/omer/haskell/ghc/inplace/test
spaces/ghc-stage2" -c T5976.hs -dcore-dno-debug-output -XTemplateHaskell
-package template-haskell -fexternal-interpreter -v0
Actual stderr output differs from expected:
--- ./th/T5976.run/T5976.stderr.normalised  2016-11-10
23:01:39.351997560 -0500
+++ ./th/T5976.run/T5976.comp.stderr.normalised 2016-11-10
23:01:39.351997560 -0500
@@ -1,7 +1,4 @@
-
-T5976.hs:1:1:
-Exception when trying to run compile-time code:
-  bar
-CallStack (from HasCallStack):
-  error, called at T5976.hs:: in :Main
-Code: error ((++) "foo " error "bar")
+ghc-iserv.bin: internal loadArchive: GNU-variant filename offset not
found while reading filename f
+(GHC version 8.1.20161107 for x86_64_unknown_linux)
+Please report this as a GHC bug:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/reportabug
+ghc: ghc-iserv terminated (-6)
*** unexpected failure for T5976(ext-interp)

Does anyone know what is this about?
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Breakage due to CallStack refactoring

[Ben Gamari]

Hi Simon,

In 317236db308d you performed some refactoring of CallStack defaulting
and noted that there was no change in visisble behavior. However, it
isn't seem that this is true. The following two tests [1] now fail as
callstacks are no longer produced in their output,

TEST="assert T10845"

Presumably this isn't expected.

Cheers,

- Ben


[1] https://phabricator.haskell.org/harbormaster/build/14964/?l=100


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

install pandoc with cabal update

[CRUMEYROLLE Pierre]

hello
y try to install pandoc in mode offline but the standard installation  
from source
preconise to execute cabal update . it seems that cabal update try to  
connect and download package from hackage.haskell.org.


do you known how to execute offline installation ?
ghc 7.10.3
cabal 1.24.0.0

best regards


___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Re: ppr of HsDo

[Alan & Kim Zimmerman]

As a follow up, I will be continuing with the least-invasive change, which
is to keep the existing braces/semis, and make sure that they are all
produced correctly.

Alan

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alan & Kim Zimmerman 
wrote:

> For context, I am putting in a test suite similar to the one for
> ghc-exactprint to ensure that the pretty printer always generates code that
> can be round tripped back to the original AST.
>
> This means that fears of some uncaught case requiring us do it the
> guaranteed safe way should be allayed.
>
> In the process I am updating the pretty printer.
>
> So the question really is, given the existence of that test suite, what
> style of code should we have in our messages, and in pretty printed code?
>
> Alan
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Simon Peyton Jones <
> simo...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It’s not about GHC’s programming style, is it?  It’s about what the
>> pretty-printer does.  If it were me I’d use braces and semicolons
>> everywhere, so that I could guarantee to parse it easily.
>>
>>
>>
>> But that’s not a strong opinion and I would willingly yield to others!
>>
>>
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Alan & Kim Zimmerman [mailto:alan.z...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* 10 November 2016 08:31
>> *To:* Simon Peyton Jones 
>> *Cc:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
>> *Subject:* Re: ppr of HsDo
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> And any thoughts on my proposal to do away with the braces/semi
>> completely?  I suspect GHC is the only significant body of code that uses
>> that style still.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <
>> simo...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think it’s because the  “;” is treated as part of the let not part of
>> the do.  After all, how does the implicit layout of the let know that the
>> let-bindings are finished?
>>
>>
>>
>> This should work
>>
>>
>>
>> foo
>>   = do { let { x = 1 };
>>  Just 5 }
>>
>>
>>
>> Now the let bindings are clearly brought to an end.  Or this
>>
>>
>>
>> foo
>>   = do { let x = 1
>>
>>; Just 5 }
>>
>>
>>
>> Now the “’;” is to the left of the x=1 and so brings the let’s implicit
>> layout to an end.
>>
>>
>>
>> But not this!
>>
>>
>>
>> foo
>>   = do { let x = 1; Just 5 }
>>
>>
>>
>> So it’s a bug in the pretty-printer, not the parser
>>
>>
>>
>> SImon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Alan
>> & Kim Zimmerman
>> *Sent:* 10 November 2016 07:01
>> *To:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
>> *Subject:* ppr of HsDo
>>
>>
>>
>> The pretty printer turns
>>
>> foo = do
>>   let x = 1
>>   Just 5
>>
>> into
>>
>> foo
>>   = do { let x = 1;
>>  Just 5 }
>>
>> which does not parse, complaining about "parse error on input ‘Just’"
>>
>> Is this a parser error or a ppr problem?  I am keen to fix the ppr to
>> output
>>
>>
>> foo
>>   = do let x = 1
>>Just 5
>>
>> but I am not sure if there is a parser bug too.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>
>
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Re: ppr of HsDo

[Alan & Kim Zimmerman]

For context, I am putting in a test suite similar to the one for
ghc-exactprint to ensure that the pretty printer always generates code that
can be round tripped back to the original AST.

This means that fears of some uncaught case requiring us do it the
guaranteed safe way should be allayed.

In the process I am updating the pretty printer.

So the question really is, given the existence of that test suite, what
style of code should we have in our messages, and in pretty printed code?

Alan


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Simon Peyton Jones 
wrote:

>
>
> It’s not about GHC’s programming style, is it?  It’s about what the
> pretty-printer does.  If it were me I’d use braces and semicolons
> everywhere, so that I could guarantee to parse it easily.
>
>
>
> But that’s not a strong opinion and I would willingly yield to others!
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *From:* Alan & Kim Zimmerman [mailto:alan.z...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 10 November 2016 08:31
> *To:* Simon Peyton Jones 
> *Cc:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
> *Subject:* Re: ppr of HsDo
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> And any thoughts on my proposal to do away with the braces/semi
> completely?  I suspect GHC is the only significant body of code that uses
> that style still.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <
> simo...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> I think it’s because the  “;” is treated as part of the let not part of
> the do.  After all, how does the implicit layout of the let know that the
> let-bindings are finished?
>
>
>
> This should work
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let { x = 1 };
>  Just 5 }
>
>
>
> Now the let bindings are clearly brought to an end.  Or this
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1
>
>; Just 5 }
>
>
>
> Now the “’;” is to the left of the x=1 and so brings the let’s implicit
> layout to an end.
>
>
>
> But not this!
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1; Just 5 }
>
>
>
> So it’s a bug in the pretty-printer, not the parser
>
>
>
> SImon
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Alan
> & Kim Zimmerman
> *Sent:* 10 November 2016 07:01
> *To:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
> *Subject:* ppr of HsDo
>
>
>
> The pretty printer turns
>
> foo = do
>   let x = 1
>   Just 5
>
> into
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1;
>  Just 5 }
>
> which does not parse, complaining about "parse error on input ‘Just’"
>
> Is this a parser error or a ppr problem?  I am keen to fix the ppr to
> output
>
>
> foo
>   = do let x = 1
>Just 5
>
> but I am not sure if there is a parser bug too.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

RE: ppr of HsDo

[Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs]

It’s not about GHC’s programming style, is it?  It’s about what the 
pretty-printer does.  If it were me I’d use braces and semicolons everywhere, 
so that I could guarantee to parse it easily.

But that’s not a strong opinion and I would willingly yield to others!

Simon

From: Alan & Kim Zimmerman [mailto:alan.z...@gmail.com]
Sent: 10 November 2016 08:31
To: Simon Peyton Jones 
Cc: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: Re: ppr of HsDo

Thanks.
And any thoughts on my proposal to do away with the braces/semi completely?  I 
suspect GHC is the only significant body of code that uses that style still.
Alan

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Simon Peyton Jones 
> wrote:
I think it’s because the  “;” is treated as part of the let not part of the do. 
 After all, how does the implicit layout of the let know that the let-bindings 
are finished?

This should work

foo
  = do { let { x = 1 };
 Just 5 }

Now the let bindings are clearly brought to an end.  Or this

foo
  = do { let x = 1
   ; Just 5 }

Now the “’;” is to the left of the x=1 and so brings the let’s implicit layout 
to an end.

But not this!

foo
  = do { let x = 1; Just 5 }

So it’s a bug in the pretty-printer, not the parser

SImon


From: ghc-devs 
[mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On 
Behalf Of Alan & Kim Zimmerman
Sent: 10 November 2016 07:01
To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: ppr of HsDo

The pretty printer turns

foo = do
  let x = 1
  Just 5
into

foo
  = do { let x = 1;
 Just 5 }
which does not parse, complaining about "parse error on input ‘Just’"
Is this a parser error or a ppr problem?  I am keen to fix the ppr to output


foo
  = do let x = 1
   Just 5
but I am not sure if there is a parser bug too.
Alan

___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Re: ppr of HsDo

[Alan & Kim Zimmerman]

Thanks.

And any thoughts on my proposal to do away with the braces/semi
completely?  I suspect GHC is the only significant body of code that uses
that style still.

Alan


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Simon Peyton Jones 
wrote:

> I think it’s because the  “;” is treated as part of the let not part of
> the do.  After all, how does the implicit layout of the let know that the
> let-bindings are finished?
>
>
>
> This should work
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let { x = 1 };
>  Just 5 }
>
>
>
> Now the let bindings are clearly brought to an end.  Or this
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1
>
>; Just 5 }
>
>
>
> Now the “’;” is to the left of the x=1 and so brings the let’s implicit
> layout to an end.
>
>
>
> But not this!
>
>
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1; Just 5 }
>
>
>
> So it’s a bug in the pretty-printer, not the parser
>
>
>
> SImon
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Alan
> & Kim Zimmerman
> *Sent:* 10 November 2016 07:01
> *To:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
> *Subject:* ppr of HsDo
>
>
>
> The pretty printer turns
>
> foo = do
>   let x = 1
>   Just 5
>
> into
>
> foo
>   = do { let x = 1;
>  Just 5 }
>
> which does not parse, complaining about "parse error on input ‘Just’"
>
> Is this a parser error or a ppr problem?  I am keen to fix the ppr to
> output
>
>
> foo
>   = do let x = 1
>Just 5
>
> but I am not sure if there is a parser bug too.
>
> Alan
>
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

RE: ppr of HsDo

[Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs]

I think it’s because the  “;” is treated as part of the let not part of the do. 
 After all, how does the implicit layout of the let know that the let-bindings 
are finished?

This should work

foo
  = do { let { x = 1 };
 Just 5 }

Now the let bindings are clearly brought to an end.  Or this

foo
  = do { let x = 1
   ; Just 5 }

Now the “’;” is to the left of the x=1 and so brings the let’s implicit layout 
to an end.

But not this!

foo
  = do { let x = 1; Just 5 }

So it’s a bug in the pretty-printer, not the parser

SImon


From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Alan & Kim 
Zimmerman
Sent: 10 November 2016 07:01
To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: ppr of HsDo

The pretty printer turns

foo = do
  let x = 1
  Just 5
into

foo
  = do { let x = 1;
 Just 5 }
which does not parse, complaining about "parse error on input ‘Just’"
Is this a parser error or a ppr problem?  I am keen to fix the ppr to output


foo
  = do let x = 1
   Just 5
but I am not sure if there is a parser bug too.
Alan
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs