Validating with Haddock

[Austin Seipp]

Excellent, thank you. We should really fix the 32bit performance
numbers too I think, based on what we discussed on IRC earlier. Would
you like to submit a patch for that too please? You can find the
numbers in testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T.

Also, is there any new documentation we should need for this? Is all
the new stuff properly documented somewhere? Etc.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Mateusz Kowalczyk
<fuuzetsu at fuuzetsu.co.uk> wrote:
> On 07/01/14 21:20, Austin Seipp wrote:
>> For the record and other people reading - after a quick discussion on
>> IRC, it simply looks like the 32-bit peak_megabytes_allocated numbers
>> for those tests probably weren't updated at the same time as the 64bit
>> ones, leaving them out of date.
>>
>
> I have now validated GHC with the new Haddock stuff in place. You can
> see the new log at [1]. The end result is the same as validation on a
> tree without changes: same 8 tests failing.
>
> I have also built and ran Haddock's own tests with HEAD and they now all
> check out. The branch at [2] should now be ready to be merged into
> upstream Haddock. If someone could merge that in, that'd be great. This
> is the new parser which contains few bug fixes. We have more changes
> than this which include user-visible features and new documentation.
>
> I'll prepare and validate those for you tomorrow and bother you some more.
>
> Let me know if anything needs changing.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1]: http://fuuzetsu.co.uk/misc/validateloghaddock
> [2]: https://github.com/sol/haddock/tree/new-parser
>
> --
> Mateusz K.
>



-- 
Regards,

Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant
Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/