Do we therefore have no interest in compilers other than GHC? Can we
drop all instances of ifdef __HUGS__ from the code?
I think doing so would require a reasonable amount of work, but would
significantly lower the barrier to contributing to Cabal.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Ian Lynagh wro
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Ben Millwood wrote:
> Do we therefore have no interest in compilers other than GHC? Can we
> drop all instances of ifdef __HUGS__ from the code?
>
> I think doing so would require a reasonable amount of work, but would
> significantly lower the barrier to contribut
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:29:23PM +, Ben Millwood wrote:
> Do we therefore have no interest in compilers other than GHC? Can we
> drop all instances of ifdef __HUGS__ from the code?
It was intended to mean only that older versions of GHC aren't
supported, not other Haskell implementations. I'
On 14 December 2012 23:33, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Ben Millwood
> wrote:
>> Do we therefore have no interest in compilers other than GHC? Can we
>> drop all instances of ifdef __HUGS__ from the code?
>>
>> I think doing so would require a reasonable amount of work,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Duncan Coutts
wrote:
> We should distinguish the compilers that can build Cabal, from those
> that cabal supports. Cabal supports several compilers that cannot
> themselves build Cabal.
>
> I am happy to drop the support for building Cabal using hugs and nhc
> as I
