Bit-rotting(?) HUGS-specific code in GHC boot libraries
roma at ro-che.info
Sun Sep 15 10:37:26 UTC 2013
Yes, you are right. It was my experience when compiling base with
haskell-names' hs-gen-iface that, unless __GLASGOW_HASKELL__ is defined,
many functions (including H2010) would simply not be defined, and some code
wouldn't even be well-formed Haskell.
First I tried to fix that on the spot, but there were so many cases that I
gave up and made hs-gen-iface define __GLASGOW_HASKELL__ despite not being
I'm not sure these ifdefs nowadays have any value whatsoever.
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvr at gnu.org> wrote:
> On 2013-09-15 at 09:06:13 +0200, Austin Seipp wrote:
> > I'm voting we delete it. In fact: I say if nobody pipes up and is
> > *committed* to maintaining it, we delete it, oh, two weeks. That's
> > standard library-proposal timeframe. (And I do mean maintenance - not
> > "drop barely enough work to get it into shape and then leave it alone
> > for 5+ more years.")
> Fyi, I've gone ahead and started preparing validate-checked removal
> commits for two of the affected packages:
> - https://github.com/hvr/packages-base/compare/kill-hugs-support
> - https://github.com/hvr/packages-array/compare/kill-hugs-support
> ...while going through the #ifdef's and playing human CPP I couldn't
> help but wonder whether the `#if(n)def __GLASGOW_HASKELL__` are worth
> it: Some places didn't look as if they would compile if
> `__GLASGOW_HASKELL__` wasn't defined.
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs