Advance notice that I'd like to make Cabal depend on parsec
simonpj at microsoft.com
Thu Mar 14 17:44:47 CET 2013
Yes I think that'd be a great plan. It's bizarre that GHC depends on *all* of Cabal, but only uses a tiny part of it (more or less the Package data type I think).
| -----Original Message-----
| From: cabal-devel-bounces at haskell.org [mailto:cabal-devel-bounces at haskell.org]
| On Behalf Of Administrator
| Sent: 14 March 2013 15:23
| To: Duncan Coutts
| Cc: Lentczner; cabal-devel; Haskell Libraries; ghc-devs at haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Advance notice that I'd like to make Cabal depend on parsec
| This GHC dependency on Cabal is putting a rather troubling constraint
| in Cabal's evolution, which in my opinion is a serious problem. When I
| first took a look at the dependencies between GHC and Cabal I found it
| a bit strange that GHC would depend on Cabal as I would expect GHC to
| be as low in the dependency tree as possible to avoid exactly these
| kinds of problems.
| These GHC dependencies on Cabal are in fact small (see
| for a summary) and with a little bit of refactoring it would be
| possible to split these dependencies into a very small shared package
| with minimal or no further dependencies. This would liberate Cabal to
| make the necessary refactoring.
| IMHO, the addition of these new dependencies to Cabal should go
| together with splitting the GHC-Cabal shared dependencies into a
| separate package so that there would be no additional coordination
| needed from then on between these two development efforts (except when
| dealing with this new package).
| On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Duncan Coutts
| <duncan.coutts at googlemail.com> wrote:
| > On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 16:06 +0100, Gregory Collins wrote:
| >> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Duncan Coutts
| <duncan.coutts at googlemail.com
| >> > wrote:
| >> > Hi folks,
| >> >
| >> > I want to give you advance notice that I would like to make Cabal depend
| >> > on parsec. The implication is that GHC would therefore depend on parsec
| >> > and thus it would become a core package, rather than just a HP package.
| >> > So this would affect both GHC and the HP, though I hope not too much.
| >> +1 from me, although the amount of potential knock-on work might be
| >> discouraging. The current cabal-install bootstrap process (which is
| >> currently pretty easy and is necessary at times) will get a bunch more deps
| >> as a result of this change, no?
| > Yes it will, but given that we do have a script it's not too bad I
| > think. And overall I think its worth it to have the better error
| > messages, performance and memory use. Do you have any idea how slow it
| > is to parse all the .cabal files on hackage, and how much memory that
| > takes? You'd be horrified :-)
| > Duncan
| > _______________________________________________
| > cabal-devel mailing list
| > cabal-devel at haskell.org
| > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
| cabal-devel mailing list
| cabal-devel at haskell.org
More information about the ghc-devs