Thanks for your information.
I was able to understand I've seen the ticket.
The `ghc-pkg check' has checked the existing of haddock-interfaces and
haddock-html.
When we just install haskell-platform from tarball, these
documentations are not installed.
On the other hand, `ghc-pkg check' complains
Thanks for your reply, Chris.
Do you know what the cause?
ghc? haskell-platform? debian? or my environment?
2012/6/8 Chris Dornan ch...@chrisdornan.com:
ghc-pkg is warning about dangling references to missing documentation. Some
of the packages on my (JustHub) distro do this: the Haskell
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 08.06.2012, 08:55 +0100 schrieb Chris Dornan:
I would like to get rid of them soon on my distro (and no doubt the Debian
people would like their packages to be warning free too).
actually in Debian it is quite common to install the -dev package, but
not the -doc packages.
ghc-pkg is warning about dangling references to missing documentation. Some
of the packages on my (JustHub) distro do this: the Haskell Platform dummy
package (as you report), and GLUT rather than zlib . AFAIK it is generally
harmless (apart from the confusion).
I would like to get rid of them
Thanks, Philipp. Worked for me as well. For others with the same symptoms,
here's the incantation I used:
sudo cabal install --reinstall --force-reinstalls --enable-documentation
--global random-1.0.1.1
And similarly for all of the other pre-installed packages. I reversed the
order listed by
2010/10/26 Claus Reinke claus.rei...@talk21.com:
Some questions about Haddock usage:
1. Haddock executable and library are a single hackage package,
but GHC seems to include only the former (haddock does not
even appear as a hidden package anymore). Is that intended?
Yes, I think that's
2010/10/24 Ryan Newton new...@mit.edu:
When I encounter a split-index (A-Z) page it can be quite frustrating if I
don't know the first letter of what I'm searching for. I want to use my
browser find! For example, tonight I wanted to look at all the functions
that END in Window in the Chart
2010/9/9 Antoine Latter aslat...@gmail.com:
CC'ing the maintainer listed on Hackage for haddock
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Christian Höner zu Siederdissen
choe...@tbi.univie.ac.at wrote:
Hi,
haddock seems to produce an error on associated data family decls.:
CC'ing the maintainer listed on Hackage for haddock
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Christian Höner zu Siederdissen
choe...@tbi.univie.ac.at wrote:
Hi,
haddock seems to produce an error on associated data family decls.:
Perhaps Haddock could exclude class instance reporting when it cannot find a
documentable link to a parameter?
The cannot find documentable link problem also comes up
in situations like this (that don't involve type classes):
module Ex ( foo ) where
data Secret = Secret
foo = Secret
On 28 August 2010 21:33, Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de wrote:
Perhaps Haddock could exclude class instance reporting when it cannot find
a
documentable link to a parameter?
The cannot find documentable link problem also comes up
in situations like this (that don't
in terms of how you could use it, that would
be equivalent to also exporting Secret [...]
well, expect that you cannot use the type's name in signatures,
so you'd have to rely on type inference.
Out of curiosity I just checked javadoc's behaviour on
public class Ex {
public interface
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 August 2010 21:33, Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de
wrote:
Perhaps Haddock could exclude class instance reporting when it cannot
find a
documentable link to a parameter?
The
Perhaps Haddock could exclude class instance reporting [...]
Instances are global, and cannot be hidden.
You cannot prevent their use, so you might as well document them.
Otherwise you'll have users complaining when they assume
the instance isn't there, and write their own,
and then see the
On 25 August 2010 21:36, Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de wrote:
Perhaps Haddock could exclude class instance reporting [...]
Instances are global, and cannot be hidden.
You cannot prevent their use, so you might as well document them.
Yes you can; in that example Alexander
In this case, the class is one defined inside that module and used
solely for those two data types; it isn't exported, and the only way
you can tell it exists is that Haddock mentions the instances.
OK.
I was confused because the text of the posting
mentioned MonadReader and MonadState (and
Does anyone have any suggestions or do I have to start building haddock
myself?
Ok I built it from source rather than using the Haskell Platform exe and it now
works. Perhaps the packager of the Haskell Platform for Windows could take a
look at why the binary is behaving as it does?
Dominic.
malcolm.wallace malcolm.wallace at me.com writes:
I haven't been following closely, but how did you install haddock? From a
binary dist? Is it possible that
one of the Windows binary dists has a baked-in location for something on
the E: drive, which existed on
the packager's machine but
David Waern david.waern at gmail.com writes:
I think using --optghc=-package-conf is the correct way to point to
another package DB, so I'll look into why it doesn't work.
Perhaps another line of attack would be to see why haddock thinks I have
an E: drive?
2010/6/15 Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org:
David Waern david.waern at gmail.com writes:
I think using --optghc=-package-conf is the correct way to point to
another package DB, so I'll look into why it doesn't work.
Perhaps another line of attack would be to see why haddock thinks I
2010/6/15 David Waern david.wa...@gmail.com:
2010/6/15 Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org:
David Waern david.waern at gmail.com writes:
I think using --optghc=-package-conf is the correct way to point to
another package DB, so I'll look into why it doesn't work.
Perhaps another line of
Try --optghc=-package-conf --optghc=file, to point Haddock at the custom
DB.
Hi David, Thanks for the quick response. No dice I am afraid. Dominic. BTW this
(using optghc) used to work on previous versions of haddock (iirc 2.4 and 2.5).
2010/6/14 Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org:
Try --optghc=-package-conf --optghc=file, to point Haddock at the custom
DB.
Hi David, Thanks for the quick response. No dice I am afraid. Dominic. BTW
this
(using optghc) used to work on previous versions of haddock (iirc 2.4 and
2.5).
2010/6/14 David Waern david.wa...@gmail.com:
OK, it seems like the path from the ghc-paths package overrided what
you specified. I'm not sure this will work, but you could try:
haddock -B
c:\p4wksp\steinitd_fpf_exdate_ws\FPF_Dev.br\ThirdParty\haskell_packages\fpf.package.conf
Sorry, that
David Waern david.waern at gmail.com writes:
2010/6/14 David Waern david.waern at gmail.com:
OK, it seems like the path from the ghc-paths package overrided what
you specified. I'm not sure this will work, but you could try:
haddock -B
2010/6/14 Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org:
So I created one and copied our custom package databse into it but still no
luck:
..\ThirdParty\Haskell_Platform\2010.1.0.0\bin\haddock.exe -B
c:\p4wksp\steinitd_fpf_exdate_ws\FPF_Dev.br\ThirdParty\haskell_packages
backendc\PAD2C.hs
haddock:
This might be heavy handed but I think I just got over this by clobbering my
.ghc directory and redoing cabal install haddock
Dave
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:23 PM, David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm on Mac OS X Snow Leopard, and can't get haddock installed due to the
following error:
The link to Data.Time
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/old-time-1.0.0.3/Data-Time.html
in System.Time
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/old-time-1.0.0.3/System-Time.html
is also dead.
There seems to be a problem with inter-package links.
C.
Christian
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:13:49PM +0100, Christian Maeder wrote:
The link to Data.Time
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/old-time-1.0.0.3/Data-Time.html
in System.Time
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/old-time-1.0.0.3/System-Time.html
is also dead.
2009/10/23 Andrea Vezzosi sanzhi...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Christian Maeder
I get the following internal Haddock or GHC error. I have no file
/local/maeder/lib/ghc-6.12.0.20091010/html/haddock.css
but a file
/local/maeder/share/doc/ghc/html/html/haddock.css
I've the
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Christian Maeder
christian.mae...@dfki.de wrote:
Hi,
with
http://darcs.haskell.org/~ghc/dist/6.12.1rc1/ghc-6.12.0.20091010-i386-unknown-linux-n.tar.bz2
installed (under /local/maeder/) I get the following internal Haddock
or GHC error. I have no file
On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 18:43 +0200, Christian Maeder wrote:
P.S. I wonder why Registering is done twice
It's Cabal's fault. It's a new feature to let components within a
package depend on each other. To do that it needs to register the lib
into a local inplace package db. At the moment it's
Simple fix (terrible error message):
Move the ( up to the line with the module name. Previous bad code:
module Data.DualMap
-- * The @DualMap@ abstract type
( DualMap ()
-- * (?) internal? -- exposed for testing purposes, for now...
, dmFlip
-- * converting
2009/6/7 Dominic Steinitz domi...@steinitz.org:
Ha! It's yet another of haddock's quirks. If I replace -- ^ by -- then haddock
accepts {-#. I'll update the ticket you created.
-- | The parse state
data S = S {-# UNPACK #-} !BL.ByteString -- ^ input
{-# UNPACK #-} !Int -- ^ bytes
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
Dominic Steinitz wrote:
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
src/Data/Binary/Strict/IncrementalGet.hs:106:11:
parse error on input `{-# UNPACK'
This is a haddock error and I presume a bug in
Dominic Steinitz dominic at steinitz.org writes:
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
Dominic Steinitz wrote:
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
src/Data/Binary/Strict/IncrementalGet.hs:106:11:
parse error on input `{-#
Dominic Steinitz wrote:
-- | The parse state
data S = S {-# UNPACK #-} !BL.ByteString -- ^ input
{-# UNPACK #-} !Int -- ^ bytes read
{-# UNPACK #-} ![B.ByteString]
{-# UNPACK #-} !Int -- ^ the failure depth
-- | The parse state
data S = S {-# UNPACK
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
src/Data/Binary/Strict/IncrementalGet.hs:106:11:
parse error on input `{-# UNPACK'
Is this a bug? Is there any way to work around it?
This is a haddock error and I presume a bug in haddock. I don't know whether
cabal installs
Dominic Steinitz wrote:
Erik de Castro Lopo mle+hs at mega-nerd.com writes:
src/Data/Binary/Strict/IncrementalGet.hs:106:11:
parse error on input `{-# UNPACK'
Is this a bug? Is there any way to work around it?
This is a haddock error and I presume a bug in haddock.
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 23:40 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
If you don't want to move from absolute paths for non-core packages,
the current system should just work, right?
Yes.
The current system being the $topdir one.
Yep. It works, it's just not nice, it's ghc-specific and only make
Currently, there seem to be $topdir and $httptopdir.
And I can't see a justification for there being two.
Each variable provides an indirection that decouples the installation
from one source of _independent_ relocations (btw, I've always imagined
that it is called 'http' instead of 'html' to
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 11:16 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
How about this: a way to specify paths in the package registration info
that
are relative to the location of the package db they are in.
ahem. That sounds like a backwards step, being dependent on two
locations instead of one.
But if you're registering global packages that are installed outside of
the GHC tree then you wouldn't register them using relative paths. I'm
not saying everything must use relative paths.
Please don't move your windmills while I'm fighting them!-)
If you don't want to move from absolute
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 14:12 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
But if you're registering global packages that are installed outside of
the GHC tree then you wouldn't register them using relative paths. I'm
not saying everything must use relative paths.
Please don't move your windmills while I'm
If you don't want to move from absolute paths for non-core packages,
the current system should just work, right?
Yes.
The current system being the $topdir one.
Though it also allows for the possibility of relocatable sets of
packages that are not installed relative to the compiler. But more
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 15:10 +0100, Alistair Bayley wrote:
Andrea,
2009/3/19 Andrea Vezzosi sanzhi...@gmail.com:
It turns out that those variables are there to allow relocation, in
fact $topdir is expanded by
Distribution.Simple.GHC.getInstalledPackages, it seems that
$httptopdir has
It turns out that those variables are there to allow relocation, in
fact $topdir is expanded by
Distribution.Simple.GHC.getInstalledPackages, it seems that
$httptopdir has been overlooked.
I'd be tempted to say that it's ghc-pkg dump/describe responsibility
to expand those vars instead,
2009/5/22 Maurício briqueabra...@yahoo.com:
The new version of haddock makes use of GHC parser. How much
of effort would take to make haddock generate pretty-print
of the source code itself, (...)
(...) Is this what you want or is there some reason why you
want the code to be pretty-printed?
The new version of haddock makes use of GHC parser. How much
of effort would take to make haddock generate pretty-print
of the source code itself, (...)
(...) Is this what you want or is there some reason why you
want the code to be pretty-printed?
I usually have to resort to braces or bad
Okay, I've written a draft Haddock-GSOC application: would any of you like to
review it / suggest how it could be improved? (or should I just submit it to
Google?) I'm particularly wondering whether my proposed time-line seems
realistic. -Isaac
* What is the goal of the project you
Simon Marlow wrote:
Obviously I think these tickets are important, since I wrote them :-) In
terms of priority, I think #1567 is at the top: not having this harms our
ability to reorganise and abstract things, it puts an arbitrary barrier
between packages. It's possible my perspective is
Isaac Dupree wrote:
I'm interested in being a GSoC student, and the Haddock-related tickets looked
like a good place to start
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/summer-of-code/ticket/1567
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/summer-of-code/ticket/1568
Jonathan Cast wrote:
NB: This example is *precisely* why I will never adopt MathML as an
authoring format. Bowing and scraping at the alter of W3C is not worth
using such a terrible syntax, not ever.
(Indented, that's
math
mrow
msup
mix/mi
mn2/mn
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 11:08 +0100, Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Jonathan Cast wrote:
NB: This example is *precisely* why I will never adopt MathML as an
authoring format. Bowing and scraping at the alter of W3C is not worth
using such a terrible syntax, not ever.
(Indented, that's
What about making a SoC out of the problem? A mathematical markup
language that is easily written as well as valid Haskell, executable
within reason, compilable into mathML (think backticks) and would
revolutionise the typeset quality of literate programming?
--
(c) this sig last receiving data
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Achim Schneider wrote:
What about making a SoC out of the problem? A mathematical markup
language that is easily written as well as valid Haskell, executable
within reason, compilable into mathML (think backticks) and would
revolutionise the typeset quality of literate
On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 12:39 +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus schrieb:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I want for long to write math formulas in a paper in Haskell. Actually,
lhs2TeX can do such transformations but it is quite limited in handling
of parentheses and does not
Heinrich Apfelmus schrieb:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I want for long to write math formulas in a paper in Haskell. Actually,
lhs2TeX can do such transformations but it is quite limited in handling
of parentheses and does not support more complicated transformations
(transforming prefix
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I want for long to write math formulas in a paper in Haskell. Actually,
lhs2TeX can do such transformations but it is quite limited in handling
of parentheses and does not support more complicated transformations
(transforming prefix notation in infix notation or
I did work on this and i simplified the code a lot fixing
inconsistencies and making more explicit what how each component
contributes to the arguments to haddock.
Aside from this, should we also do the unliting and cpp from Cabal on
the sources passed to HsColour?
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:27
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 19:18 +0100, Andrea Vezzosi wrote:
I did work on this and i simplified the code a lot fixing
inconsistencies and making more explicit what how each component
contributes to the arguments to haddock.
Much appreciated.
Aside from this, should we also do the unliting and
2009/2/6 Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk:
Yes, against my better judgement the code in Cabal for haddock-2.x does
not run cpp or unliting like it does for haddock-0.x. Instead it assumes
that haddock-2.x will do all the cpp and unliting itself. Obviously this
mean the special
2009/2/6 Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM, David Waern david.wa...@gmail.com wrote:
As for running arbitrary commands, I think we are opening up to a lot
of unfamiliar syntax. I'd like to hear what everyone thinks about
that.
I personally find it useful to have
2009/2/6 Alistair Bayley alist...@abayley.org:
[1 of 1] Compiling Test.Fail( Test\Fail.hs, Test\Fail.o )
Test\Fail.hs:11:26:
Can't make a derived instance of `Typeable Fail'
(You need -XDeriveDataTypeable to derive an instance for this class)
In the data type declaration
On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 09:40 +0100, David Waern wrote:
2009/2/6 Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM, David Waern david.wa...@gmail.com wrote:
As for running arbitrary commands, I think we are opening up to a lot
of unfamiliar syntax. I'd like to hear what everyone
[1 of 1] Compiling Test.Fail( Test\Fail.hs, Test\Fail.o )
Test\Fail.hs:11:26:
Can't make a derived instance of `Typeable Fail'
(You need -XDeriveDataTypeable to derive an instance for this class)
In the data type declaration for `Fail'
Are you processing the above module
2009/2/6 Alistair Bayley alist...@abayley.org:
I have this test case for Haddock (2.3.0):
--
|
Module : Test.Haddock
Copyright : (c) 2009 Alistair Bayley
License : BSD-style
Maintainer : alist...@abayley.org
Stability :
On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 11:48 +0100, David Waern wrote:
2009/2/6 Alistair Bayley alist...@abayley.org:
[1 of 1] Compiling Test.Fail( Test\Fail.hs, Test\Fail.o )
Test\Fail.hs:11:26:
Can't make a derived instance of `Typeable Fail'
(You need -XDeriveDataTypeable to derive an
Hi everyone,
I received this question from Lennart Augustsson (via Simon M) and
thought I'd send out an inquiry to the Haskell community in general
(Lennart, I hope you don't mind):
Lennart writes:
We have some local patches for haddock that extends the blah
syntax so you can put TeX formulae
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM, David Waern david.wa...@gmail.com wrote:
As for running arbitrary commands, I think we are opening up to a lot
of unfamiliar syntax. I'd like to hear what everyone thinks about
that.
I personally find it useful to have Haddock comments readable in the source.
Hi Simon,
http://joyful.com/repos/darcs-sm/api-doc is a mashup of
haddock, hoogle and hscolour (and darcsweb, darcs-graph - see
http://joyful.com/repos).
I can see the Haddock information, but not the Hoogle/HsColour mashup.
I'm using Firefox 3. Am I missing something? How do you get
Hi Neil.. my apologies, my nightly cron script clobbered it. Please try
now, same url: http://joyful.com/repos/darcs-sm/api-doc
You should see three panes with hoogle in the lower left.
The answer is to add a line similar to:
@haddock
Hi Neil.. my apologies, my nightly cron script clobbered it. Please try
now, same url: http://joyful.com/repos/darcs-sm/api-doc
It seems the Contents link embeds the outer frame into the right-hand side
inner frame. Otherwise, it looks nice!
Sean
Hi
The answer is to add a line similar to:
@haddock
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/Cabal/latest/doc/html/
to the Text file you get out of haddock --hoogle.
You can also add an @hackage url, which is treated as the home page of
the package.
Aha, I had not detected that at
that one day cabal will pass some --hoogle-extra flags or something to
haddock, but I've not yet decided how packages should specify where
they live - if you have any suggestions do let me know.
Will do.. I've yet to come to grips with cabal, still in makefile land
as yet..
For your example
Taking this to haskell-cafe..
http://joyful.com/repos/darcs-sm/api-doc is a mashup of haddock, hoogle
and hscolour (and darcsweb, darcs-graph - see http://joyful.com/repos).
It's rough but quite useful - a few minutes here gave me a much better
understanding of the big picture of darcs code. By
Ronald Guida wrote:
I just upgraded to ghc-6.8.3, using a linux binary, and I am having a
problem compiling Haddock. Haddock 2.1.0 and Haddock 2.0.0.0 both
fail to build under ghc-6.8.3, but they both build successfully with
ghc-6.8.2. I don't know if this is a Haddock problem, or a GHC
Matti Niemenmaa wrote:
I now get some sort of System.Process-related link error, though. YMMV.
Audrey Tang gave me the fix for this on the IRC channel: passing
--ghc-option=-package process-1.0.0.1 dealt with that.
It appears that it was all for naught, though: running the haddock binary on
I have added ticket #18 to the Haddock Trac.
http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/wiki
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 07:38 +0200, Johannes Waldmann wrote:
Does this mean that literate source files should be discouraged? They
seem to be fairly common, especially in conjunction with Cabal (i.e.,
Setup.lhs).
I think the reason for having Setup.lhs instead of Setup.hs
is that you
I never thought about that. I've been using Setup.hs with
#!/usr/bin/env runhaskell and never had any problems.
I guess the only thing that would be gained by using Setup.lhs is the
ability to compile the setup program. Is that something that's commonly
done?
Richard G.
Johannes Waldmann
I never thought about that. I've been using Setup.hs with #!/usr/bin/env
runhaskell and never had any problems.
I guess the only thing that would be gained by using Setup.lhs is the
ability to compile the setup program. Is that something that's commonly
done?
That's what I do. My normal
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 15:39 +0100, Alistair Bayley wrote:
I never thought about that. I've been using Setup.hs with #!/usr/bin/env
runhaskell and never had any problems.
I guess the only thing that would be gained by using Setup.lhs is the
ability to compile the setup program. Is that
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 22:20 -0600, Richard Giraud wrote:
I'm looking at the Test.HUnit modules and there are no Haddock
annotations. I thought I'd help document the modules but, when I had a
look at the source files, I found they were .lhs instead of .hs. There
is already some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does this mean that literate source files should be discouraged? They
seem to be fairly common, especially in conjunction with Cabal (i.e.,
Setup.lhs).
I think the reason for having Setup.lhs instead of Setup.hs
is that you can put
David Waern david.waern at gmail.com writes:
2008/3/24, Dominic Steinitz dominic.steinitz at blueyonder.co.uk:
What should I be using for the file name for the read-interface option
in haddock?
You must use a file that is on your own hard drive and that is
generated with version 2.0
You probably need to add 'directory' to the depends in the .cabal file.
- Phil
On Dec 17, 2007 2:27 PM, Deborah Goldsmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see this:
$ runhaskell ./Setup.lhs build
Preprocessing executables for haddock-0.8...
shift/reduce conflicts: 5
Building haddock-0.8...
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 14:27 -0800, Deborah Goldsmith wrote:
I see this:
$ runhaskell ./Setup.lhs build
Preprocessing executables for haddock-0.8...
shift/reduce conflicts: 5
Building haddock-0.8...
src/Main.hs:49:7:
Could not find module `System.Directory':
it is a member
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I like to write documentation comments like
fix ::
( a {- ^ local argument -}
- a {- ^ local output -} )
- a {- ^ global output -}
but Haddock doesn't allow it. Or is there a trick to get it work?
Haddock only supports documenting the top-level
Conal Elliott wrote:
I'm running haddock for the first time, via cabal. I get the following
message when i do runhaskell Setup.hs haddock on monadLib:
Warning: cannot use package base-2.0:
HTML directory $topdir\html\libraries\base does not exist.
I do have
Simon Marlow wrote:
Conal Elliott wrote:
I'm running haddock for the first time, via cabal. I get the
following message when i do runhaskell Setup.hs haddock on monadLib:
Warning: cannot use package base-2.0:
HTML directory $topdir\html\libraries\base does not exist.
I do have
This is due to the way GHC is installed on Windows, the package database doesn't
have hardcoded pathnames, the idea being that you can move your GHC anywhere in
the filesystem and it will still work.
this is an essential feature (for instance, running GHC from a USB or network drive,
or just
Thanks for the explanation suggestions, Simon. Your other workaround
worked for me: I replaced $topdir\\html with c:\\ghc\\ghc-6.6\\doc\\html in
my package.conf. Note the *doc*, so a straightforward $topdir splice would
not do the trick. Cheers, - Conal
On 12/5/06, Simon Marlow [EMAIL
[ moving to haskell-cafe@haskell.org ]
Claus Reinke wrote:
This is due to the way GHC is installed on Windows, the package
database doesn't have hardcoded pathnames, the idea being that you can
move your GHC anywhere in the filesystem and it will still work.
this is an essential feature (for
Brian Hulley wrote:
Hi -
I have the following code:
data MState = MState -- details omitted
type MonadStateMState = MonadState MState -- necessary for Haddock
newtype ManagerM a =
ManagerM (StateT MState IO a)
deriving (Monad, MonadIO, MonadStateMState)
which
Simon Marlow wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
Hi -
I have the following code:
[snip]
Is this just a bug in Haddock or am I misunderstanding something
about Haskell?
It's a bug / missing feature in Haddock. Haddock is basically pretty
dumb when it comes to understanding Haskell code; it knows
Daniel Fischer wrote:
Hi all,
I've just installed haddock-0.7, nice, but...
haddock -o h7doc -h -D h7doc/fusi.haddock --use-package=base Verwaltung.hs
Teams.hs Stats.hs Match.hs Main.hs Liga.hs Item.hs Helpers.hs Datum.hs
Warning: Helpers: could not find link destinations for:
GHC.Base.Int
Daniel Fischer wrote:
Hi all,
I've just installed haddock-0.7, nice, but...
haddock -o h7doc -h -D h7doc/fusi.haddock --use-package=base Verwaltung.hs
Teams.hs Stats.hs Match.hs Main.hs Liga.hs Item.hs Helpers.hs Datum.hs
Warning: Helpers: could not find link destinations for:
GHC.Base.Int
Daniel Fischer wrote:
Hi all,
I've just installed haddock-0.7, nice, but...
haddock -o h7doc -h -D h7doc/fusi.haddock --use-package=base Verwaltung.hs
Teams.hs Stats.hs Match.hs Main.hs Liga.hs Item.hs Helpers.hs Datum.hs
Warning: Helpers: could not find link destinations for:
GHC.Base.Int
Am Mittwoch, 8. März 2006 12:06 schrieben Sie:
Daniel Fischer wrote:
Hi all,
I've just installed haddock-0.7, nice, but...
haddock -o h7doc -h -D h7doc/fusi.haddock --use-package=base
Verwaltung.hs
Teams.hs Stats.hs Match.hs Main.hs Liga.hs Item.hs Helpers.hs Datum.hs
Warning:
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
