-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Er,
> For the purpose of warnings, I would explicitly keep track, for
> unqualified operator "-", whether it was followed by a digit (which is
> the unique and certain determiner that a numeric literal follows. Octal
> and hexadecimal start with 0c fo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Marlow wrote:
>> So does this suggest that under a negation-is-part-of-numeric-token
>> regime, 123-456 should be two tokens (a positive number then a negative
>> number, here), as is signum-456 ...
>
> Yes, absolutely.
[see note 1 at the end r
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 08:49:03PM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Ah. I was about to checkin a replacement for System.Posix.Types (in
> > > base) that uses hsc2hs instead of autoconf.
> >
> > Anyway, to answer your question, using hsc2hs in Syste
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 04:33:27PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> I'm confused. I thought we copied the configuration from the target to the
> host as part of the bootstrapping process, but now I can't see how this is
> supposed to happen for HsBaseConfig.h. It looks like following the
> inst
Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ah. I was about to checkin a replacement for System.Posix.Types (in
> > base) that uses hsc2hs instead of autoconf.
>
> Anyway, to answer your question, using hsc2hs in System.Posix.Types
> will cause problems for bootstrapping GHC, yes, because we ca
I'm confused. I thought we copied the configuration from the target to the host
as part of the bootstrapping process, but now I can't see how this is supposed
to happen for HsBaseConfig.h. It looks like following the instructions in the
building guide will result in failure if you try to cross
Hi
I'm hoping that by the end of this summer, nhc98 will be able to compile
the whole of ghc. :-) Also, and alternatively, the yhc chaps have
mooted the idea of moving from nhc98's front end to ghc's, which might
eventually give you a fully portable bytecode route to bootstrapping ghc
on new m
Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suppose we could add a dependency on another Haskell compiler just to
> run hsc2hs, but that's a pain.
I'm hoping that by the end of this summer, nhc98 will be able to compile
the whole of ghc. :-) Also, and alternatively, the yhc chaps have
mooted t
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also after the base
reorg we might find we have no hsc2hs-generated code left in base and
we can disable hsc2hs to prevent this happening again.
Ah. I was about to checkin a replacement for System.Posix.Types (in
base) that use
Hi Chris,
On Apr 12, 2007, at 9:48 AM, C.M.Brown wrote:
Hello,
I've been trying to build the ghc-devel package (6.7) from macports.
However the build seems to fail half through. Specifically when
running
the setup for base-2.1:
configure: Using compiler: ../../compiler/ghc-inplace
configu
Hello,
I've been trying to build the ghc-devel package (6.7) from macports.
However the build seems to fail half through. Specifically when running
the setup for base-2.1:
configure: Using compiler: ../../compiler/ghc-inplace
configure: Compiler flavor: GHC
configure: Compiler version: 6.7.200704
Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also after the base
> reorg we might find we have no hsc2hs-generated code left in base and
> we can disable hsc2hs to prevent this happening again.
Ah. I was about to checkin a replacement for System.Posix.Types (in
base) that uses hsc2hs instead of a
This last piece of conversation was *so* reminiscent of a paper[1] I once
read, I was almost convinced it was late by 11 days...until I checked :)
Cheers,
Dinko
[1] http://www.research.att.com/~bs/whitespace98.pdf
On 4/12/07, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Isaac Dupree wrote:
Isaac Dupree wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Isaac Dupree wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
I definitely think that -1# should be parsed as a single lexeme.
Presumably it was easier at the time to do it the way it is, I don't
remember exactly.
I'd support a warning for use of p
Thorkil Naur wrote:
Hello,
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 16:41, Ian Lynagh wrote:
We are pleased to announce the Release Candidate phase for GHC 6.6.1.
...
A few comments to the source bundles
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/stable/dist/ghc-6.6.20070410-src.tar.bz2
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist
On Apr 11, 2007, at 19:39 , Thorkil Naur wrote:
Hello,
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 16:41, Ian Lynagh wrote:
We are pleased to announce the Release Candidate phase for GHC 6.6.1.
...
A few comments to the source bundles
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/stable/dist/ghc-6.6.20070410-
src.tar.bz2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Isaac Dupree wrote:
> Simon Marlow wrote:
>>> I definitely think that -1# should be parsed as a single lexeme.
>>> Presumably it was easier at the time to do it the way it is, I don't
>>> remember exactly.
>>>
>>> I'd support a warning for use of pref
17 matches
Mail list logo
