Is it possible to set environment variables which ghc will look at,
corresponding to command line options such as '-i' or '-package-conf'?
I.e. the equivalent of gcc's LIBRARY_PATH, CPATH, etc... or perl's
PERL5LIB or even PERL5OPT (which is the most flexible). These would be
really convenient
Yes, that makes sense. I think I will do that. Whether it'll make it
into 6.4 is doubtful
S
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Paterson
| Sent: 08 March 2005 16:29
| To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
|
Another Mac OS X installer:
http://opeongo.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wolfgang/GHC-6.4.20050308.pkg.zip
Features:
*) all the normal GHC 6.4 features
*) dynamic linking
*) nice icons you can double-click to open a terminal window with ghci
(one for H98 and one for -fglasgow-exts)
*) You can even drag your
OK, it's done for 6.4
SImon
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Paterson
| Sent: 08 March 2005 16:29
| To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
| Subject: infix type operators
|
| The User's Guide says:
|
|
Is it possible to set environment variables which ghc will look at,
corresponding to command line options such as '-i' or '-package-conf'?
I.e. the equivalent of gcc's LIBRARY_PATH, CPATH, etc... or perl's
PERL5LIB or even PERL5OPT (which is the most flexible). These would be
really convenient
Hi Simon,
this is just to let you know that I successfully compiled the lastest
snapshot (ghc-6.4.20050308). Initial tests look promising. Thanks!
Cheers, Ralf
PS: Just curious: is the gcc route easier than the NCG? To me it seems
much more fragile.
On 09 March 2005 08:29, Frederik Eaton wrote:
Is it possible to set environment variables which ghc will look at,
corresponding to command line options such as '-i' or '-package-conf'?
I.e. the equivalent of gcc's LIBRARY_PATH, CPATH, etc... or perl's
PERL5LIB or even PERL5OPT (which is the
On 09 March 2005 10:14, Ralf Hinze wrote:
this is just to let you know that I successfully compiled the lastest
snapshot (ghc-6.4.20050308). Initial tests look promising. Thanks!
Cheers, Ralf
PS: Just curious: is the gcc route easier than the NCG? To me it seems
much more fragile.
It's
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:19:18PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 09 March 2005 08:29, Frederik Eaton wrote:
Is it possible to set environment variables which ghc will look at,
corresponding to command line options such as '-i' or '-package-conf'?
I.e. the equivalent of gcc's LIBRARY_PATH,
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:01:40AM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:19:18PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 09 March 2005 08:29, Frederik Eaton wrote:
Oh, is that the only reason? That's a terrible reason to not have a
feature. :) You could just write a 'ghcbug' script
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:01:40AM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:19:18PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 09 March 2005 08:29, Frederik Eaton wrote:
Oh, is that the only reason? That's a terrible
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:27:28AM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
I was complaing (only to myself) that rsync doesn't allow to put some
common options in ~/.rsyncrc or an environment variable. Then I simply
added an alias in
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:14:24PM +0100, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:27:28AM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
I was complaing (only to myself) that rsync doesn't allow to put some
common options in
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 11:55:11AM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
I am still not convinced that it is a good idea to add such
functionality to GHC. Do you want to persuade developers of
every program you use to add similar feature?
Is the perceived difficulty of that task an argument
I agree that the case you're presenting is indeed more difficult, but
I don't think you're doing the estimations right for the one at hand.
The cost and annoyance of perhaps tens of thousands of people adding
and remembering to maintain wrappers named 'ghc' somewhere in their
path to
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 01:12:49PM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
Are you volunteering to be that person? ;-)
Are you saying that a patch would be accepted?
I am not the one to decide.
Best regards
Tomasz
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 01:12:49PM -0800, Frederik Eaton wrote:
I agree that the case you're presenting is indeed more difficult, but
I don't think you're doing the estimations right for the one at hand.
The cost and annoyance of perhaps tens of thousands of people adding
and
On 09 March 2005 21:13, Frederik Eaton wrote:
I agree that the case you're presenting is indeed more difficult,
but I don't think you're doing the estimations right for the one at
hand. The cost and annoyance of perhaps tens of thousands of people
adding and remembering to maintain wrappers
On 09 March 2005 19:55, Frederik Eaton wrote:
I agree that the case you're presenting is indeed more difficult, but
I don't think you're doing the estimations right for the one at hand.
The cost and annoyance of perhaps tens of thousands of people adding
and remembering to maintain wrappers
OK, well I'll be busy for the next few weeks so if someone else wants
to step up and do it, don't wait for me. But otherwise I'll put in on
my todo list.
Cheers,
Frederik
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:40:03PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 09 March 2005 21:13, Frederik Eaton wrote:
I agree
We'll definitely take the environment variable patch if it comes with a
ghcbug script :-)
OK, well I'll be busy for the next few weeks so if someone else wants
to step up and do it, don't wait for me. But otherwise I'll put in on
my todo list.
Cheers,
Frederik
--
http://ofb.net/~frederik/
[warning: Very Vague message possible bug-report follow]
Though I cannot claim any real-world experience with arrows, I'm
not sure I like this, and I hope they'll at least remain
experimental (may be removed next release kind of thing) for a
while.
- I doubt whether the difference between Arrow
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 11:59:40PM +0100, Remi Turk wrote:
- It's one thing more to learn. The difference between types and
typevariables (upper/lowercase) is better visible than the
difference between operator(variables) and infix-types (Does
it start with a colon?) Which, I have to
Agreed. I was surprised by the language inconsistency when I discovered
that symbols were ruled out for type variables. It just seemed natural
to me when programming with arrows, and I'm surprised it hasn't shown
itself useful before. - Conal
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 09/03/2005, at 8:15 PM, Wolfgang Thaller wrote:
Another Mac OS X installer:
http://opeongo.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wolfgang/GHC-6.4.20050308.pkg.zip
Works great for me. The double-clickable icons for GHCi are great, too
(I'm sure it'll help out many Mac users who have to use GHC In their
first year
Wolfgang,
Another Mac OS X installer:
http://opeongo.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wolfgang/GHC-6.4.20050308.pkg.zip
Works great for me. The double-clickable icons for GHCi are great, too
I second that.
How much effort did take to construct the installer? Is it a process
that could easily be automated? Would
26 matches
Mail list logo
