vectorisation code?

[Manuel M T Chakravarty]

The way I see it, the main cost of keeping DPH around is to handle breakages such as that with vector. I can’t promise to address those in a timely manner, which is why I agreed to disable/remove DPH.

However, as Geoff stepped forward, this issue is solved. As for the overhead in compile time etc, I don’t think, it is that much of a deal. During development, most compiles runs are incremental anyway.

Concerning handling of the DPH libraries, since Austin was looking at putting some love into the —slow test suite. Maybe we could re-active the DPH tests, and hence, DPH library builds for ”slow” testing. The DPH libraries have shaken out many GHC bugs in the past. Adding them to ”slow” would ensure they don’t bit rot, improve the test suite, but keep it out of the main path for dev builds.

Manuel

> Geoffrey Mainland <mainland at apeiron.net>:
> 
> On 01/22/2015 10:50 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
>> On 2015-01-22 at 14:59:51 +0100, Geoffrey Mainland wrote:
>>> The current situation is that DPH is not being built or maintained at
>>> all. Given this state of affairs, it is hard to justify keeping it
>>> around---DPH is just bitrotting.
>>> 
>>> I am proposing that we reconnect it to the build and keep it building,
>>> putting it in minimal maintenance mode. 
>> Ok, but how do we avoid issues like
>> 
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.ghc.devel/5645/
>> 
>> in the future then? DPH became painful back then, because we didn't know
>> what to do with 'vector' (which as a package at the time also suffered
>> from neglect of maintainership)
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>>  hvr
>> 
> 
> That's part of "minimal maintenance mode." Yes, keeping DPH will impose
> some burden. I am not pretending that keeping DPH imposes no cost, but
> instead asking what cost we are willing to pay to keep DPH
> working---maybe the answer is "none."
> 
> As for the particular issue you mentioned, I patched DPH to fix
> compatibility with the new vector. Those changes have been in the tree
> for some time, but DPH was never reconnected to the build, so it has
> bitrotted again.
> 
> Note that vector *also* no longer builds with the other libraries in the
> tree, so if we excise DPH, we should excise vector.
> 
> I am willing to put some effort into fixing these sorts of problems when
> they come up. That may still impose too much burden on the other developers.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs