Very helpful Artella.
Your page is about *using* Haskell or GHC on Windows. That is usefully
distinct from how to *build* GHC on Windows; there is a separate page on the
Trac wiki about that.
I’ve added a clarifying sentence to your page, and added links from each to the
other.
I’m cc’ing a
I’d be OK with this, (it’s a bit like requiring signatures on all top level
functions) but I don’t know how we’d enforce it.
Do you think the requirement should be for all top-level functions or just
exported ones?
I agree that Notes have a different purpose. But it should be OK style to
The problem is that this instruction requires three separate registers,
but cmpxchgl already reads and writes %eax leaving only two free
registers (%ecx and %edx).
You'll need to arrange to not use the complicated addressing modes with
cmpxchg on i386, and keep the number of free regs
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Simon Peyton Jones
simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
I’d be OK with this, (it’s a bit like requiring signatures on all top level
functions) but I don’t know how we’d enforce it.
I think social enforcement is enough. If we agree that this is
something we want to do
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that this instruction requires three separate registers, but
cmpxchgl already reads and writes %eax leaving only two free registers (%ecx
and %edx).
You'll need to arrange to not use the complicated
On 27/06/2014 12:23, Johan Tibell wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that this instruction requires three separate registers, but
cmpxchgl already reads and writes %eax leaving only two free registers (%ecx
and %edx).
You'll need to
I would counter propose a place on hackage for people to type in or modify
the documentation for functions, designed in such a way that the
documentation would easily find its way back into the project's source code
(with developer approval.) This way the documentation can be generated by
people
On 06/27/2014 01:19 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Simon Peyton Jones
simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
I’d be OK with this, (it’s a bit like requiring signatures on all top level
functions) but I don’t know how we’d enforce it.
I think social enforcement is enough.
Hi,
it seems that
commit 05120ecd95b2ebf9b096a95304793cd78be9506e
Author: Edward Z. Yang ezy...@cs.stanford.edu
Date: Fri Jun 27 13:48:19 2014 +0100
Make -fno-write-interface to all modes of GHC, not just -fno-code.
I don't think this is mutually exclusive with Johan's proposal. Let me suggest
an amendment: Developers (both new and old) would be encouraged to submit
patches adding or improving documentation in the source code. Documentation
patches would be vetted as any others would be.
Discouraging
I succeeded to solve all of them :-)
But now I am blocked on on a panic
not in scope during type checking, but it passed the renamer.
I suspect that while deriving Generic some instances are defined in
some empty TcEnv, which does not contain my definition in context.
Is there a way to inject
On 06/27/2014 03:26 PM, David Fox wrote:
I would counter propose a place on hackage for people to type in or modify
the documentation for functions, designed in such a way that the
documentation would easily find its way back into the project's source code
(with developer approval.) This way
Hello,
I am a bit unclear on what you mean by programatically: do you mean from
within GHC or is that using something like Template Haskell?
-Iavor
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Gabor Greif ggr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello devs,
I have
{{{
data D (n :: Symbol)
}}}
in my module, and I
I noticed that the Cabal package doesn’t have a branch for ghc-7.8:
http://git.haskell.org/packages/Cabal.git
Is that intended? Maybe as a result the instructions at
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Building/GettingTheSources
to check out a branch from the *GitHub mirror repos*
We could create a branch for 7.8, but I don't know which commit to branch
of. If someone can figure out which cabal 7.8 shipped with we can add the
branch.
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Manuel M T Chakravarty
c...@cse.unsw.edu.au wrote:
I noticed that the Cabal package doesn’t have a
15 matches
Mail list logo
