Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: Why are people suddenly using the term morally when they mean why doesn't this do what I think it should? None of its definitions seem to match what you mean: The usage on this thread seems a bit nonstandard, but I'm assuming it's based off the more general idiom of things being morally equivalent--- that is, things which *should* be equal because we mean for them to be (regardless of what a particular model (e.g., a programming language) says). In other words, with the right set of beliefs (i.e., moral beliefs, or the right religion) they are indeed equal, but the world is violating those beliefs somehow. The implication being that the world (model, PL,...) should be changed, rather than the beliefs. -- Live well, ~wren ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
On Apr 15, 2010, at 08:49 , Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: Why are people suddenly using the term morally when they mean why doesn't this do what I think it should? None of its definitions seem to match what you mean: That depends on how cynical you are about religion. :) -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
What happened was this: 1. add some modules to a library (but forget to mention them in the cabal file), then (in the lib source dir, without cleaning/reconfiguring) cabal install --global (runs without complaint) 2. re-compile an application that uses the library (cabal configure cabal build): this gave undefined symbol errors (for things from the added modules) (with ghc-6.12.1 on i386 debian) I still don't see why this other-modules is needed. Ok, I understand the technical reason that cabal does not do dependency analysis but morally, it should? Best regards - J.W. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
Hi, On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 14:40, Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de wrote: What happened was this: 1. add some modules to a library (but forget to mention them in the cabal file), then (in the lib source dir, without cleaning/reconfiguring) cabal install --global (runs without complaint) 2. re-compile an application that uses the library (cabal configure cabal build): this gave undefined symbol errors (for things from the added modules) Just to say that this has happened to me very often as well, on Windows. The first time it took me quite some time to realize what was going wrong... Cheers, Pedro ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de writes: What happened was this: I still don't see why this other-modules is needed. Ok, I understand the technical reason that cabal does not do dependency analysis but morally, it should? Why are people suddenly using the term morally when they mean why doesn't this do what I think it should? None of its definitions seem to match what you mean: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=moral -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote: Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de writes: What happened was this: I still don't see why this other-modules is needed. Ok, I understand the technical reason that cabal does not do dependency analysis but morally, it should? Why are people suddenly using the term morally when they mean why doesn't this do what I think it should? None of its definitions seem to match what you mean: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=moral The proper use of words isn't dictated by what is found in small dictionaries but by the speakers of the language. Also I would caution against the judgement 'sudden' if you haven't done a corpus check: the recency illusion can be a real pain. 'Morally' seems just the perfect word for this occasion --- concerned with right or proper conduct. In this case, potential discrepancies between the files that cabal 'knows' about when issuing different commands; or the sense of deceit when it 'appears' to work only for faults to appear further down the line. I would guess this is just something we have to live with if cabal can't be expected to include its own parser dependency chaser. Documentation is always a good first step though :-) Cheers, D ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: cabal: other-modules
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Dougal Stanton dou...@dougalstanton.net wrote: 'Morally' seems just the perfect word for this occasion --- concerned with right or proper conduct. In this case, potential discrepancies between the files that cabal 'knows' about when issuing different commands; or the sense of deceit when it 'appears' to work only for faults to appear further down the line. Beyond that, there are long established traditions in some parts of programming and mathematics for using ethical/moral terms to describe qualities that go beyond just technical requirements or correctness; this program should do the Right Thing, that bit of code is evil, and so on. Actually defining this moral sense is difficult, though, and it varies somewhat from one person to another, but there seems to be at least some common, shared understanding. It's about should and proper instead of is or must. Personally, I know I've written code that I'd feel guilty about even if it worked perfectly and no one else ever saw it--what else would you call that feeling? From another angle, here's an example of explicit moral terminology applied to mathematics: http://www.cheng.staff.shef.ac.uk/morality/ The mathematical sense there is slightly different from the programming sense, I think, but there seems to be some crossover. For instance, I've gotten the impression that something like a mathematical moral sense underlies much of the interest in programming language semantics, FRP, and dependently-typed languages, though I don't know if the people involved would necessarily call it that. - C. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
